Preamble

The House met at a Quarter before Three of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER in the Chair.

PRIVATE BUSINESS.

Public Offices (Sites) Amendment Bill,

Ordered, That the Examiners of Petitions for Private Bills do examine the Public Offices (Sites) Amendment Bill with respect to compliance with the Standing Orders relative to Private Bills.

New Junction Canal Bill,

Calder and Hebble Navigation Bill,

Walthamstow Corporation Bill,

Reported, with Amendments; Reports to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Oral Answers to Questions — SCOTLAND.

HOUSING.

Mr. McKINLAY: 1.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland if he is aware of the formation of a brickmakers selling agency in Glasgow and the West of Scotland, and that the said agency will control the supply of 100,000,000 bricks per annum; whether he is aware of the intention of this agency to fix minimum prices; and what steps he proposes to take to safeguard the operation of the Slum Clearance Act to prevent any attempt to raise prices against local authorities proceeding with schemes of re-housing under the said Act?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Johnston): I have seen a Press report to the effect that an agency on the lines indicated by my hon. Friend is being set up. If it should appear that the operations of this agency result in an increase in the price of bricks, the matter will at once be brought to the attention of the Inter-Departmental Committee appointed to survey the prices of building materials, but I earnestly trust that the anticipated
increase in the number of houses to be built consequent on the passing of the Housing (Scotland) Act, 1930, will not in any quarter be used as an opportunity to increase the cost of building materials.

Mr. TRAIN: 2.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland the number of houses built in Glasgow under the various Housing Acts since 1919; the number at present let; and what arrears of rent are outstanding?

Mr. JOHNSTON: As the answer involves a rather long tabular statement, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Mr. TRAIN: Will the hon. Gentleman, in considering this question, consider bringing into line the rents of the houses under the various schemes, and making comparable rents for comparable houses?

Mr. JOHNSTON: The question on the Paper asks, not for an answer on policy, but for a table of statistics. I suggest to the hon. Member that he should pursue his supplementary question on another occasion.

Following is the answer:

The number of houses built in Glasgow under the various Housing Acts since and including that of 1919 up to 31st December, 1930, is as follows:


By Local Authority:



Housing Town Planning etc. (Scotland) Act, 1919
4,988


Housing etc. Act, 1923—



(a) General
2,480


(b) Slum Clearance
4,684


Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1924
12,974


Housing (Scotland) Act, 1930
—



25,126

By Private Enterprise:



Housing (Additional Powers)Act, 1919
146


Housing (Additional Powers)Act, 1919, Public Utility Societies
85


Housing etc. Act, 1923
2,338


Housing etc. Act, 1923, Public Utility Societies
—

Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1924
2,840


Housing (Financial Provisions) Act, 1924, Public Utility Societies
—



5,409


Government Steel Houses
760


Grand Total
31,295

I am informed that all the houses built by the corporation are at present let, and that the amount of arrears of rent outstanding on these houses (including recoverable arrears) is approximately £27,200. Corresponding information relating to houses built by assisted private enterprise is not available.

Mr. TRAIN: 3.
asked the Secretary of State for Scotland how many local authorities have submitted schemes to the Scottish Department of Health under the recent slum-clearance legislation; how many have been approved; and if any have begun operations?

Mr. JOHNSTON: As the answer is long and involves a number of figures, I propose, with the hon. Member's permission, to circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.
Following is dm answer:
The Housing (Scotland) Act, 1930, does not require the submission of formal schemes by local authorities, but only of proposals for dealing with insanitary houses.
Up to date, the Department of Health for Scotland have approved for the purposes of subsidy under the Act proposals for the erection of 612 houses by five local authorities, and these authorities have begun operations. In addition, Clearance Resolutions have been submitted to the Department by five other local authorities in terms of Sub-section 2 of Section 1 of the Act in respect of 40 areas embracing 1,780 houses occupied by 7,424 persons. I am aware that proposals are under consideration by many other local authorities.
I may add that 117 out of 227 local authorities have submitted to the Department general statements in terms of Sub-section 2 of Section 22 of the
Act, showing that they estimate that 60,201 houses are required to meet their needs, and that they intend to provide 40,822 of these house in the next three years. The local authorities are being asked to expedite the completion of the details of these proposals so that full advantage can be taken of this year's building season.

CHILD ADOPTION ORDERS.

Mr. MATHERS: 5.
asked the Lord Advocate whether he is now fully informed of the difference in the cost of obtaining child adoption orders in Scotland as compared with England; and what steps is he taking in an endeavour to simplify and cheapen the Scottish procedure?

The LORD ADVOCATE (Mr. Craigie Aitchison): I am not aware of any difference in cost, but, if my hon. Friend will put before me any concrete case in which the charges appear to be excessive, I will have the matter looked into.

Mr. MATHERS: Is my right hon. and learned Friend not aware that, very largely, the difference in the costs entailed in putting through an adoption order in Scotland as compared with England is due to the heavy charge for the employment of a curator ad litem; and is it not possible for provision to be made, as I know is done in England, for some voluntary agency to undertake this task?

The LORD ADVOCATE: The expense of a curator ad litem is not greater in Scotland than in England. I understand that in England there is a practice of responsible people undertaking the work voluntarily, and, if this suggestion were made to the Courts in Scotland, I have no reason to think but that it would be given effect to.

Oral Answers to Questions — COAL INDUSTRY.

ROYALTIES.

Mr. TINKER: 7.
asked the Secretary for Mines the amount of royalties paid in Lancashire during 1928 and 1929?

The SECRETARY for MINES (Mr. Shinwell): The estimated total amount of royalties paid by colliery owners in Lancashire and Cheshire in 1928 was £361,300, and in 1929 £373,400.

Sir GEORGE HAMILTON: Can the hon. Gentleman say what part of those sums relates to Lancashire, as the question only refers to Lancashire, and what part relates to Cheshire?

Mr. SHINWELL: For this purpose Lancashire and Cheshire are included in one district.

WORKINGS (DISTANCE FROM SHAFT).

Mr. TINKER: 8.
asked the Secretary for Mines if his Department has given consideration to the distance which workings in mines extend from the shaft; and if he intends to take steps to regulate the maximum distance to which they should go?

Mr. SHINWELL: The subject has been considered by the Mines Department on more than one occasion, but I have no present intention to ask Parliament to prescribe a maximum distance.

Mr. TINKER: Will my hon. Friend see that attention is paid to this matter in the inquiry that is about to be held?

Mr. SHINWELL: As my hon. Friend is aware, the nature of the inquiry is in the hands of the person who conducts it. In this case, it will be the Chief Inspector of Mines, and I have no doubt that he will take cognisance of that aspect of the matter.

Lieut. - Colonel Sir A. LAMBERT WARD: Is not this result attained more or less automatically by the increased cost of maintenance when the coal face becomes too far away from the shaft?

Mr. SHINWELL: I am afraid that that is an entirely different question.

Mr. HARDIE: In view of the fact that some collieries are able to produce in excess of their quota under the Act, would it not be possible to close down mines in which the workings are a long way from the shaft, especially where they are under the sea, and to make arrangements for their quota to be transferred to other mines?

Mr. SHINWELL: The matter is not finally disposed of; it is being considered by a joint committee of the Miners' Federation and the owners.

SUNDAY LABOUR.

Mr. ERNEST WINTERTON: 9.
asked the Secretary for Mines whether his attention has been called to the fact that miners are being employed on Sundays in the South Derbyshire coalfield after they have worked for 90 hours under the spread-over during the previous fortnight; and what steps he proposes to take to deal with this contravention of the Coal Mines Act, 1930?

Mr. SHINWELL: The answer to the first part of the question is in the affirmative. As regards the second part, the Coal Mines Act, 1930, has no bearing on Sunday labour, and I am advised that there has been no breach of that Act.

Mr. McSHANE: Is my hon. Friend aware that this aspect of the matter is causing very serious discontent in that area, and that the men are making great complaints?

Mr. SHINWELL: If my hon. Friend is referring to Sunday labour, I would say that, although it may cause some discontent, it is not within my power to put a stop to it.

Mr. TINKER: Does the spread-over include the seven days of the week?

Mr. SHINWELL: No, I am afraid not. The proviso which enables the spread-over to be operated applies to the 12 week-days in a fortnight.

Mr. WINTERTON: Does my hon. Friend suggest that Sunday labour is permissible after 90 hours have been worked in a fortnight under the spread-over?

Mr. SHINWELL: Sunday labour in the mines is a matter of arrangement between the parties concerned, and, where it is in operation, I have no power to put an end to it.

Mr. TINKER: It is not exclusive of the 90 hours?

Mr. SHINWELL: I am afraid that it is. At all events, I have been legally advised that it is. In any case, however, it is not a subject which is capable of being dealt with by question and answer.

BOYS (EMPLOYMENT UNDERGROUND).

Mr. GORDON MACDONALD: 12.
asked the Secretary for Mines the number of boys under 16 years of age employed underground in the mining industry of
Great Britain, along with the number of accidents amongst such boys, specifying fatal and non-fatal, for each of the last three years, giving separate figures for Lancashire and Cheshire?

NUMBER of BOYS under 16 years of age employed below-ground at mines under the Coal Mines Act, 1911, and the number of such boys killed and injured, during the years 1927,1928 and 1929.


—
Average number employed below-ground.
Number of Boys killed.
Number of Boys disabled for more than 3 days.


Lancashire and Cheshire.





1927
…
…
…
…
…
1,216
3
296


1928
…
…
…
…
…
1,107
3
232


1929
…
…
…
…
…
1,316
3
301


Great Britain.





1927
…
…
…
…
…
29,563
35
6,518


1928
…
…
…
…
…
26,663
30
6,114


1929
…
…
…
…
…
28,574
40
7,122


Similar particulars for 1930 are not yet available.

WORKERS (STATISTICS).

Mr. G. MACDONALD: 14.
asked the Secretary for Mines the number of workers employed in or about collieries in Great Britain, in each of the coal-producing countries on the Continent of Europe, and in the United States of America for each of the last five years?

NUMBER OF WORKERS EMPLOYED in and about Collieries in Great Britain, the principal coal-producing countries of Europe and the United States of America during the years 1926–1930.


Country.
1926.
1927.
1928.
1929.
1930 (provisional).




Thousands.
Average for:
Thousands.


Great Britain
…
(Mar. 1,097) (Dec. 925)
1,005
921
939
12 months
917


Germany









Ruhr
…
364
383
359
355
11 months
319


Upper Silesia
…
48
51
56
58
10 months
47


France
…
301
307
297
290
11 months
294


Saar
…
70
68
58
57
11 months
55


Belgium
…
160
175
163
151
10 months
153


Netherlands
…
32
34
34
36
12 months
38


Poland
…
114
115
113
125
7 months
121


Czechoslovakia
…
58
58
58
58
Not available


United States
…
759
759
683
655

WORKING AGREEMENTS.

Sir NICHOLAS GRATTAN-DOYLE: 6.
asked the Secretary for Mines how many working agreements now in operation in the coal-mining industry under the Coal Mines Act, 1930, will again require cons-

Mr. SHINWELL: As the answer involves a number of figures, I will, with my hon. Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

Mr. SHINWELL: As the answer involves a number of figures, I will, with my hon. Friend's permission, circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

The information, so far as available, is as follows:

sideration by the National Industrial Board when the hours clauses of the Act expire in July this year?

Mr. SHINWELL: The Coal Mines National Industrial Board was established to inquire into any dispute, as to the terms
of a proposed agreement in a district, which might be referred to the Board by either party after a failure to settle the dispute in accordance with the arrangements existing for that purpose in the district. It is clearly impossible to give any estimate of the number of disputes (if any) which may be referred to the Board in the future in the circumstances referred to.

ACCIDENTS.

Mr. TOOLE: 10.
asked the Secretary for Mines how many colliers have lost their lives in pit disasters during the last 20 years?

Mr. SHINWELL: For the purposes of this answer I am assuming an artificial distinction between an accident and a disaster and treating as disasters accidents in which 10 or more lives were lost. There were 22 such disasters in and about mines under the Coal Mines Act, 1911, during the 20 years 1911 to 1930, resulting in 1,070 deaths. Of these deaths 682 were caused by three disasters.

Mr. TOOLE: Can the Minister give me any figures showing how many mining royalty owners have been injured in the pits during the same period?

Oral Answers to Questions — TRADE AND COMMERCE.

EMPIRE MARKETING BOARD.

Mr. MANDER: 15.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs the amount that it is proposed to spend on research and publicity through the Empire Marketing Board in 1931 as compared with previous years?

The SECRETARY of STATE for DOMINION AFFAIRS (Mr. J. H. Thomas): Subject to the necessary provision being made by Parliament, it is proposed to spend from the Empire Marketing Fund, in 1931, £425,000 on research and £105,000 on publicity. The approximate amounts spent in the last few years on these services have been respectively as follows:

On Research.—£121,000 in 1927, £232,000 in 1928, £377,000 in 1929, and £476,000 in 1930.
On Publicity.—2238,000 in 1927, £278,000 in 1928, £222,000 in 1929, and £2213,000 in 1930.

Mr. GRAHAM WHITE: 17.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether any tangible evidence has been produced of the commercial value of the expenditure incurred by the Empire Marketing Board?

Mr. THOMAS: It is impossible to assess the commercial results of the Board's work in the wide field of Empire production with which its research, marketing and publicity activities are concerned. Individual instances, however, are frequently brought to notice in which the work of the Board has been of direct commercial advantage to Empire producers, both at home and overseas.

Mr. WHITE: Does the right hon. Gentleman think that this publicity gives full value for the £105,000 which he proposes to spend on it?

Mr. THOMAS: I know that there is a number of people who dispute the value of this expenditure, especially those engaged in other kinds of publicity.

Mr. HANNON: Is it not a fact that the trade organisations in the Dominions, whenever they have had the opportunity, have expressed appreciation of the admirable work that is being done by the Board?

Mr. THOMAS: The Imperial Conference unanimously commended it.

Mr. MANDER: Do they make any contribution towards it?

Mr. HAYCOCK: If there is such appreciation, why is there not reciprocity on the part of the Dominions?

RUSSIAN TRADE AGREEMENT (DOMINIONS).

Mr. ALBERY: 18.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs, in view of the fact that none of the Dominions have entered into negotiations for the admission of a Russian trade delegation, whether he has drawn their attention to the facilities afforded by articles four and six of the Russian trade agreement?

Mr. THOMAS: His Majesty's Governments in the Dominions were kept fully in touch with the negotiations leading up to the Agreement in question. The terms of the Agreement itself, as finally concluded, and of the accompanying declarations were also, of course, communicated to them.

Mr. ALBERY: Has the right hon. Gentleman received from Canada any expression of opinion as to trade relations with Russia?

Mr. THOMAS: No. All the Dominions were communicated with and the terms of the Agreement submitted to them. It might? be misunderstood and it would be impertinent on my part to ask whether they understood what this Agreement meant.

TIMBER.

Mr. PRICE: 22.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what is the present average wholesale price of a standard of Russian timber imported into this country and what was the price for 1928, 1929, and 1930; what is the present retail price of a standard of the usual size of building timber in this country; and what was the price of the same in 1928, 1929, and 1930?

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. William Graham): I am unable to furnish any information as to the average wholesale price of a

The following TABLE shows the total quantities of Wood and Timber imported into the United Kingdom and registered as consigned from the undermentioned Countries during the years 1928, 1929 and 1930.


Country whence consigned.
1928.
1929.
1930.


Hard Wood.
Other Wood.
Hard Wood.
Other Wood.
Hard Wood.
Other Wood



Cu. ft.
Loads.
Cu. ft.
Loads.
Cu. ft.
Loads.


Canada
5,165,698
305,401
4,805,145
306,112
3,932,761
294,843


Norway
24,322
357,774
16,583
393,716
12,513
341,553


Sweden
68,287
1,466,934
45,425
1,739,114
48,103
1,403,135


Finland
964,949
1,817,042
1,413,430
1,996,148
1,380,364
1,614,480


Soviet Union (Russia).
209,751
1,675,719
259,185
2,324,113
199,662
2,931,261

WAR MATERIAL (EXPORTS TO RUSSIA).

Major-General Sir ALFRED KNOX: 25.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will give a list of the materials of war despatched from Great Britain to Soviet Russia from June, 1929, to December, 1930?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permission, circulate in the OFFICIAL REPORT a statement showing the details as recorded.
standard of Russian timber imported into this country, but the average declared values per load of sawn soft timber imported from Russia in 1928, 1929, and 1930, were £4 14s. 2d., £4 12s. 3d., and £4 4s. 9d., respectively, while in December, 1930, the average declared value was £4 8s. 9d. According to particulars published in the "Builder" the wholesale price per standard of timber described as "good building deal, 3 by 9 inches," was £24 from the beginning of 1928 to 14th November, 1930, when the price fell to £22, at which figure it has remained up to the present time. No information is available as to the retail price of timber.

Sir ARTHUR STEEL-MAITLAND: 40.
asked the President of the Board of Trade the quantities of timber imported into this country from Canada, Norway, Sweden, Finland, and Russia for each of the years 1928, 1929, and 1930?

Mr. GRAHAM: As the answer contains a number of figures I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following is the answer:

Sir A. KNOX: Does this include tanks?

Mr. GRAHAM: Yes. They amount to only £44,000, but tanks are included under the last heading, namely, military and naval ordnance stores.

Captain GUNSTON: Will it be possible to find out the war material imported into Russia from other countries?

Mr. GRAHAM: I am afraid I could not furnish details. It is as much as I can do to answer for this country.

Captain PETER MACDONALD: Is it not a fact that cash payments were made for these war materials?

THE FOLLOWING TABLE shows the total quantity and declared value of the exports of arms ammunition and military and naval stores of domestic manufacture from Great Britain and Northern Ireland registered during the period from June, 1929, to December, 1930, both inclusive, as consigned to the Soviet Union (Russia).


Description.
Unit of Quantity.
Quantity.
Declared Value.


Ammunition:


£


Sporting Ammunition:





Loaded Cartridges
No.
500
3



Cwt.
—


Other, including shot, but excluding empty cartridge cases.
Cwt.
80
197


Blasting Accessories (including detonators, cables, etc.).
Cwt.
—
46


High Explosives, other than blasting powder, collodion cotton, and trinitrotoluol:





Gelatinous
Cwt.
268
1,800


Rockets and other pyrotechnic products
—
(a)
89


Explosives and Ammunition, not elsewhere specified in the Export List.
—
(a)
330


Arms:





Ordnance:





Automatic machine and quick firing guns and parts thereof.
No.
1
623



Cwt.
1


Gun mountings and carriages and parts thereof
No.
5
444



Cwt.
1


Small Arms:





Sporting Guns
No.
2
222



Cwt.
—


Military, Naval and Ordnance Stores and appliances, not elsewhere specified in the Export List.
—
(a)
40,251


Total
—
—
44,005


(a) Recorded by value only.

IRON AND STBEL INDUSTRY.

Major COLVILLE: 24.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what answer he has returned to the communication addressed to him by the National Federation of Iron and Steel Manufacturers, directing his attention to the position of this industry and particularly to the fact that steel production is at present at approximately only 30 per cent. of production capacity; and what action he proposes to take in the interest of the workers in this industry?

Major BEAUMONT THOMAS: 35.
asked the President of the Board of Trade, with regard to the resolution passed by the National Federation of Iron and Steel Manufacturers on 15th January, which he has received, whether

Mr. SPEAKER: That does not arise on the questions.

Following is the statement:

he proposes to take any steps to deal with the situation?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The communication from the National Federation of Iron and Steel Manufacturers has been acknowledged. As regards the action to be taken I can add nothing to the reply on this subject which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for King's Norton on 3rd February.

Major COLVILLE: In what parts of the country has the Government policy resulted in the employment of more work people in this industry?

Mr. GRAHAM: The industry, unfortunately, is suffering from the general depression in trade, but we have taken a
very definite part in the reorganisation of iron and steel, and I hope that these will mature at an early date.

Mr. R. A. TAYLOR: How does the relative decline in iron and steel in Great Britain compare with Germany and the United States?

Mr. BROCKWAY: Is the right hon. Gentleman considering the suggestion of an import board for the industry?

Mr. SPEAKER: That raises another question altogether.

MARKETING.

Mr. MANDER: 28.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will consider the advisability of appointing a home marketing board for national development in this country?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The functions of such a board as the hon. Member appears to have in mind are already exercised in large measure by the Empire Marketing Board, the Department of Overseas Trade (as in the British Industries Fair) and other existing Government organisations.

Mr. MANDER: Does not the right hon. Gentleman think that some co-ordination between all these different bodies is necessary and advisable?

Mr. GRAHAM: Yes, co-ordination goes on every day.

NEWSPAPER PRINTING MACHINERY (IMPORTS).

Mr. ALBERY: 29.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he will state the value of the newspaper printing machinery imported into this country during the years 1928, 1929, and 1930?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The imports of newspaper printing machinery, as such, are not separately recorded in the trade returns of the United Kingdom. The total declared value of newspaper, letterpress and lithographic machines and parts thereof imported into the United Kingdom during the years 1928, 1929 and 1930 was £714,920, £881,652 and £1,009,696, respectively, and the total imports of typesetting machines and parts thereof during the same years amounted to £115,870, £123,578 and £167,038, respectively.

Mr. ALBERY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say approximately where the bulk of these imports comes from?

Mr. GRAHAM: Very largely from the United States and Germany.

Mr. JAMES HUDSON: Is my right hon. Friend aware that a considerable part of this machinery has been absorbed by newspapers engaged in a propaganda against foreign imports?

GERMANY (TRADING AGREEMENTS).

Mr. CHATER: 31.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will obtain particulars from His Majesty's representatives in Germany concerning a recent decree of the German Ministry of Economy declaring null and void all agreements between manufacturers, wholesalers and retailers as regards the retail prices for trade-marked articles and ordering a 10 per cent. cut in the prices for such articles; and whether he will inform the House of the result?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I have received particulars of the decree to which my hon. Friend evidently refers, and am arranging for a translation to appear in the Board of Trade Journal.

RUSSIA.

Mr. BOOTHBY: 37.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether His Majesty's Government propose to enter into negotiations with the Government of the Union of Socialist Soviet Republics in order to secure that certain classes of British goods, such as cured herrings, shall be imported into Russia in exchange for the goods which we purchase from them?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: No such negotiations are in contemplation. I would, however, remind the hon. Member that His Majesty's Government have encouraged exports to Russia by guaranteeing credits under the Export Credits Guarantee Scheme and otherwise. As a result exports to Russia have very materially increased during the past year.

Mr. BOOTHBY: Is it not a fact that during the last two years the trading results have been very advantageous to Russia and very unfavourable to this country; and, in view of the fact that the Soviet Government controls imports, what is there to prevent His Majesty's
Government entering into direct negotiations with the Soviet Government in, order to secure some practical reciprocal trading advantage to this country?

Mr. GRAHAM: I have said, in reply to previous questions on that point, that you cannot isolate countries in that way and treat the balance on the lines suggested by my hon. Friend. As regards this particular proposal, I fear for reasons which I cannot give in reply to a supplementary question, that it is not really practical politics at the present time.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Is is not a fact that exports of herrings to Russia are paid for by the Russian timber which comes into this country?

Mr. BOOTHBY: There is none.

Lieut.-Commander KENWORTHY: Oh, yes.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: In the particular circumstances of trade in Russia, is it not possible to isolate trade with Russia with regard to imports and exports even though it is not possible to do so with regard to other countries?

Mr. GRAHAM: In reply to the supplementary question of my hon. and gallant Friend, last year 182,000 cwts. of herrings were exported. As regards the second supplementary question, I fear that I must adhere to the previous replies, that I do not think you can isolate international trade in that way.

Lord EUSTACE PERCY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say why it is possible to negotiate with a foreign capitalist Government to reduce imports but impossible to negotiate with a Socialist Government to raise a boycott?

Mr. GRAHAM: In reply to the Noble Lord, I must say that I do not admit his contention for a single moment.

Mr. MARLEY: Are we to take it that this is a direct inducement on the part of the Opposition for the Government to enter into trading action?

Sir WILLIAM DAVISON: 39.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the Board is aware that the Russian Soviet Government is preparing to dump some 30,000 tons of soap on the British market, which it is proposed to sell at
the price of 1½d. per tablet; and what action the Government intend to take in the matter?

Mr. GRAHAM: I have seen reports in the Press that soap is being imported from Russia and sold at low prices, but I have no information as to the quantities it is proposed to import. As regards the last part of the question I would refer the hon. Member to the answer given to the hon. Member for Kingston-on-Thames (Sir G. Penny) on the 3rd November.

Sir W. DAVISON: What is the object of having a Board of Trade at all if it does not concern itself with matters of such vital importance both to trade and to employment?

Mr. BOOTHBY: On a point of Order. I should like to give notice, in view of the unsatisfactory replies of the President of the Board of Trade on this question of Russian trade, that I propose to raise the matter on the Adjournment at the earliest possible moment.

STATISTICS (EXPORTS).

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: 41.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what was the volume of the exports from Germany, France, and Great Britain, respectively, in 1930, expressed in percentages of the volume in 1929?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: Eliminating the effect of price changes, the volume of the domestic export trade of Germany, including deliveries on account of Reparations, was 4.6 per cent. less in 1930 than in 1929. In the case of the United Kingdom, there was a reduction of 18.1 per cent. Similar information in respect of France is not available.

Lord E. PERCY: Are we to understand that the reduction of 18 per cent. is entirely due to world causes?

Mr. GRAHAM: I think that it was overwhelmingly due to world causes.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Then can the right hon. Gentleman tell us why the reduction in the case of Germany was only 4 per cent.?

Mr. GRAHAM: There are innumerable other considerations to be taken into account.

IMPORTED GOODS (LABOUR CONDITIONS).

Captain P. MACDONALD: 42.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what steps are being taken to ascertain whether goods imported into this country are produced under conditions against which the British people cannot compete without lowering their standard of living?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: With regard to the ascertainment of costs of production abroad I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave on the 20th January to a question by the hon. Member for Birkenhead, East (Mr. Graham White), I would remind him, however, that, the competitive power of British manufacturers in any particular instance depends upon other factors as well as upon wage costs.

Mr. SMITHERS: Can the right hon. Gentleman say if his attention has been drawn to some of the sworn statements as to conditions of labour in Russia?

Mr. MILLS: No name or address.

FINANCE AND INDUSTRY.

Major THOMAS: 49.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he has yet received the report of the Government Committee on Finance and Industry; and whether, in view of the importance of the subject, he will publish the findings of the committee at the earliest possible date?

The CHANCELLOR of the EXCHEQUER (Mr. Philip Snowden): I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member for Bethnal Green (Major Nathan) on the 20th January.

Mr. HAMMERSLEY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether the committee has now completed the taking of evidence?

Mr. SNOWDEN: In the reply to which I have referred, I said that they were considering their report.

Oral Answers to Questions — CINEMATOGRAPH FILMS ACT.

Mr. DAY: 23.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether any recent fresh appointments hate been made to the advisory committee under the Cinematograph Films Act?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: One-half of the members of this Committee recently retired in rotation. To fill the vacancies the Board or trade have appointed Mr. C. M. Woolf, representing film makers, and Mr. A. B. King, representing film exhibitors; the remaining vacancies have been filled by the re-appointment of the retiring Members.

Mr. DAY: Has the right hon. Gentleman experienced any difficulty in obtaining nomination's for this Committee?

Mr. GRAHAM: No, Sir.

Mr. MANDER: Are any of the present members associated with American interests?

Mr. GRAHAM: Not td my knowledge, but I should require notice if details were required.

Mr. DAY: 32.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will state the number of applications made to his Department, for the six months ended to the last convenient date, for exemption certificates for non-compliance with the quota conditions as laid down in the Cinematograph Films Act, 1927; and will he state the number which are at present under consideration by his Department?

Mr. GRAHAM: In addition to the submission in respect of the last quota year, concerning which I gave my hon. Friend information in reply to his question of 27th January, 12 submissions have been received in respect of the present quota year from exhibitors who have ceased during that period to carry on business at the cinema for which they were licensed. They are all at present under consideration.

Mr. DAY: Does that include any applications at present before the Department?

Mr. GRAHAM: My information that those are the applications, namely, the 12 since the last quota year ended.

Oral Answers to Questions — MERCANTILE MARINE (HYGIENE).

Dr. MORRIS-JONES: 27.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether the joint committee set up by the Board of Trade and the Ministry of Health
to inquire into the question of the hygiene of the mercantile marine has yet presented its report?

Dr. HASTINGS: 26.
asked the President of the Board of Trade if he has yet received the report of the Inter-departmental Committee on the Health of the Mercantile Marine?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: The joint committee's advice on the various questions referred to it from time to time by the Board of Trade or the Ministry of Health is submitted to the Departments as its consideration of each subject is completed and no general report is published. The inquiry into seamen's mortality statistics is proceeding satisfactorily, but will necessarily take some time to complete. The question of crew spaces has been engaging the special attention of the Board of Trade, of the Joint Committee of the Board of Trade and Ministry of Health, and of the Shipping Federation. Draft instructions to surveyors have been placed before the Merchant Shipping Advisory Committee, and I hope soon to be able to make a statement on the subject.

Dr. MORRIS-JONES: Is the right hon. Gentleman aware that, whereas this country leads the world in general sanitation, so far as sanitation on ships is concerned, we are behind Continental countries, and will he proceed further with the investigation?

Mr. GRAHAM: I could not pronounce on that comparison in reply to a supplementary question, but we are pursuing this matter with all possible speed. I await with great interest the further statement to which the reply refers.

Oral Answers to Questions — COMPANIES ACT.

Sir JOHN FERGUSON: 33.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether he will in future require defaulting public companies to pay a charge of not less than £2 to cover the cost of the departmental work needed to remind such defaulting companies that they have not obeyed Section 108 of the Companies Act, 1929?

Sir N. GRATTAN-DOYLE: 34.
asked the President of the Board of Trade whether a fine or fee is exacted from the
1,884 public companies which failed to make the returns required by Section 108 of the Companies Act in order that the Exchequer may be reimbursed the cost of staff maintenance and correspondence incurred to save those companies from being prosecuted for breaking the law?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: It is assumed that the reference is to the copy of the annual return which has to be filed with the Registrar under Section 110 of the Companies Act. Under the table in the Tenth Schedule to the Act a filing fee of 5s. has to be paid to the Registrar in all cases when this document is registered and under Section 379 the Board of Trade are prohibited from increasing the amount of this fee. I have no power to impose a special fee for unpunctuality or failure to file the document, the question of penalty being one for the Court in the event of a successful prosecution.

Oral Answers to Questions — SAFEGUARDING AND IMPORT DUTIES.

GLOVE, CUTLERY AND GAS MANTLE INDUSTRIES.

Captain P. MACDONALD: 36.
asked the President of the Board of Trade what has been the course of employment and unemployment in the glove, cutlery and gas mantle industries since 1st April, 1930, up to the latest available date?

Mr. W. GRAHAM: As the answer contains a number of figures I will circulate it in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Captain MACDONALD: Is it not a fact that unemployment has increased in these three industries?

Mr. GRAHAM: That is debatable apart from the general trade depression, because the trades, as these figures show, are really, in the aggregate, very small.

Captain MACDONALD: If the figures are not very large, may we have them now?

Following is the answer:

The following table shows the average numbers of workpeople employed in the glove-making, cutlery and gas mantle industries during the year 1930, so far as particulars have been received. Information is not available as to the numbers unemployed in these industries.

Quarter.
Glove-making.
Cutlery.
Gas Mantles.


Leather Gloves.
Fabric Gloves.


1930.
Average numbers of Workpeople employed.


First Quarter
9,129
959
3,494
1,648


Second Quarter
9,049
862
3,574
1,370


Third Quarter
8,881
838
Not yet available
1,212

Notes.—The particulars in respect of gloves have been furnished by the Joint Industrial Council for the Glove-making Industry, and are stated to relate to firms which, in 1924, employed in the leather glove industry about 88 per cent. of the cutters and in the fabric glove industry about 82 per cent. of the cutters.

The cutlery figures have been supplied by the Sheffield Cutlery Manufacturers' Association and are stated to be in respect of 41 firms, which are estimated to have employed in 1924 not more than 40 per cent. of the persons employed in the whole industry.

The figures for the gas mantle industry, supplied by the Trade Association concerned, relate to the average weekly number of persons employed by firms which are claimed to represent about 95 per cent. of the output of the whole industry.

SILK DRESSES.

Sir J. FERGUSON: 53.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if his attention has been directed to a recent conviction for a false declaration made in connection with the importation of silk dresses from France; and will he give consideration to the raising of the duty payable by private individuals to the same level as that paid by dressmaking establishments, which would have the effect of giving increased employment in that trade?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I am aware that a firm of dressmakers was recently fined for under-declaring the value of imported dresses. As regards the second part of the question, I cannot anticipate my Budget statement.

Oral Answers to Questions — AFFORESTATION (EMPLOYMENT).

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: 43.
asked the Parliamentary Secretary to the Board of Trade, as representing the Forestry Commissioners, how many men are at present employed on afforestation schemes; and what is the maximum number it is proposed to employ during the present year?

The PARLIAMENTARY SECRETARY to the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. W. R. Smith): The number of persons now employed by the Forestry Commissioners—excluding 62 forest officers and 108 office staff—is 3,305; it is anticipated that the maximum number that will be employed this year will be approximately 4,000.

Lieut. - Commander KENWORTHY: Can my hon. Friend say whether, in view of the heavy unemployment, it is intended to extend the programme in the near future?

Mr. SMITH: The programme is being extended as rapidly as possible, but any big extension is not possible until we are able to raise the plants, which will take about three years.

Oral Answers to Questions — BRITISH ARMY.

ENLISTMENTS UNDER AGE.

Mr. TINKER: 44.
asked the Secretary of State for War if he can state the number of recruits who have joined the Army during 1929 and 1930 where application has been made for their release because they have joined under military age; and will he say how many have been granted release?

The SECRETARY of STATE for WAR (Mr. T. Shaw): I regret I am not in a position to give the information for which my hon. Friend asks without disproportionate labour. But during the recruiting years ended 30th September, 1929 and 1930, the numbers of recruits discharged for having made a misstatement as to age on attestation were 573 and 573 respectively.

Mr. McSHANE: Is my right hon. Friend considering raising from 17 to 18 the age at which such boys should be accented without the consent of their parents?

RECRUITING (INFANTRY).

Major GLYN: 60.
asked the Secretary of State for War to what extent the recent special effort to obtain recruits for the infantry of the line has been successful; what the effective strength of the infantry; and what percentage of the recruits were rejected for medical reasons during the last three months?

Mr. SHAW: 3,842 recruits for the infantry of the line were finally approved last month compared with 2,391 during the same month last year. The regimental strength of the infantry of the line, including those in India, on 1st January, 1931, was 96,749. As regards the last part of the question, information as to the percentage of recruits rejected on medical and physical grounds during January is not yet available, but the percentage for all arms of the Regular Army during the three months ended 31st December, 1930, was 53.6.

Major GLYN: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what steps he has taken to advertise in the Employment Exchanges the advantages of joining the services?

Mr. SHAW: I understand that the Employment Exchanges have recruiting materials supplied to them.

ROYAL ARMY MEDICAL CORPS.

Major GLYN: 61.
asked the Secretary of State for War what is the present strength of the Royal Army Medical Corps officers, non-commissioned officers and other ranks; and how far short are these figures of the authorised establishment?

Mr. SHAW: I will, with the hon. and gallant Member's permission, circulate the figures in the OFFICIAL REPORT.

Following are the figures:

Statement showing the present establishment, strength and deficiency of the Royal Army Medical Corps (Regular Army):


Officers:


Establishment
…
…
863


Strength
…
…
739*


Deficiency
…
…
124


Other ranks:


Establishment
…
…
3,707


Strength
…
…
3,658


Deficiency
…
…
49


*This figure includes 57 temporary commissioned officers and retired officers re-employed.

CHEMICAL WARFARE SCHOOL, PORTON.

Mr. WHITE: 62.
asked the Secretary of State for War whether proposals are under consideration for reducing the establishment of the chemical warfare school at Porton?

Mr. SHAW: The chemical warfare school, which trains officers and noncommissioned officers as regimental instructors in defensive measures against gas, has become the anti-gas wing of the small arms school. No reduction of establishment is contemplated.

Mr. MANDER: Is it not a fact that we have undertaken not to make use of chemical warfare?

Mr. SHAW: I believe that there is a Treaty of that kind, but from countless speeches made by peace advocates like myself it is known that gases are in existence, and I am certainly not going to be a party to anything that will prevent our people from knowing how to guard against them.

Mr. KIRKWOOD: Is there a Christian chaplain attached to this school?

Mr. SHAW: I understand that at all the Army establishments the men have a choice of preachers from pretty well every religion.

TANKS.

Sir NAIRNE STEWART SANDEMAN: 63.
asked the Secretary of State for War what is the average age of the tanks in the Tank Corps; and how many tanks of the latest model are in use?

Mr. SHAW: It would not be in the public interest to give such information.

Sir N. STEWART SANDEMAN: Are we to understand that the new model is in common use in the Tank Corps and that a great many of the old tanks have been scrapped?

Mr. SHAW: I must ask the hon. Member kindly to accept the answer I have given, that it is not in the public interest to give information of this character.

PERSONNEL (WASTAGE).

Mr. AYLES: 64.
asked the Secretary of State for War the annual wastage of men in the Army through retirement, sickness, death, and other causes, for the years 1926, 1927, 1928, 1929, and 1930; and what percentage this bears to the total strength?

Mr. SHAW: My hon. Friend will find detailed information on this subject for the years ended 30th September, 1926–1929 in Table 6 (pages 28 to 31) of the General Annual Report on the British Army for 1929. Similar information for the year ended 30th September, 1930 will appear in the General Annual Report for 1930, which I hope to present to the House in the course of a few weeks.

Mr. AYLES: Will the right hon. Gentleman kindly send me a copy of the volume to which be refers?

Mr. SHAW: I cannot guarantee to send copies of books when they can be found in the Library of the House.

PENSIONS.

Mr. HOFFMAN: 66.
asked the Secretary of State for War if he will consider the desirability of granting to men in receipt of pension under Article 1,163 of the Royal Warrant a 1914, the age increases in pension at 55 and 65 granted to men in receipt of service pension awarded after the issue of Army Order 325 of 1919?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the WAR OFFICE (Mr. Sanders): Pensions under Article 1,163 of the Royal Warrant of 1914 are only given to soldiers who enlisted while the 1914 code was still in force and who prove to be ineligible for any award on the Great War or post-War scale. Such men, who would otherwise be ineligible for any pension, are given the benefit of the 1914 code, but I regret that I am unable to grant them in addition the increases for age which are only permissible under the later codes.

Oral Answers to Questions — FISHING INDUSTRY (INQUIRY).

Mr. BOOTHBY: 45.
asked the Prime Minister when the report of the committee which is inquiring into the fishing industry will be completed; and whether it will be published?

The PRIME MINISTER (Mr. Ramsay MacDonald): I understand that the committee will complete the taking of oral evidence at their meeting to be held on the 13th instant, and that they are now engaged in the preparation of their report.

Oral Answers to Questions — DEVELOPMENT SCHEMES(LOAN).

Mr. MANDER: 48.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether the Government is prepared to consider the raising of a development loan to be used for the execution of plans already prepared and worked out?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I would refer the hon. Member to the statement I made on the Motion for the Adjournment of the House on Thursday last.

Mr. MANDER: Am I to understand that the right hon. Gentleman would not be opposed to a loan for such a purpose as is outlined in the question?

Mr. SNOWDEN: I said all that I think needs to be said in that statement, and the hon. Member must draw his own conclusion.

Oral Answers to Questions — GOVERNMENT DEPARTMENTS.

NEW BUILDINGS, WHITEHALL.

Mr. DOUGLAS HACKING: 50.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he will instruct the Howard Frank Committee to include the proposals for new Government buildings in Whitehall in their investigations and to report upon their desirability?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: The Committee has concluded its investigations.

Mr. HACKING: Will the right hon. Gentleman consider setting up some other form of inquiry before a definite decision is taken to spend this huge sum of money?

Mr. SNOWDEN: It was decided some time age that we should proceed with this work, and I believe my right hon. Friend the First Commissioner of Works has already introduced a Bill for this purpose.

Captain MACDONALD: Is the necessity for these buildings so urgent that the Government cannot delay?

GOVERNMENT BUILDINGS, EDINBURGH.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: 75.
asked the First Commissioner of Works if he has any statement to make with regard to the proposed changes in public buildings in Edinburgh; and, if so, whether he can state the estimated cost of those changes?

Mr. PALING (Lord of the Treasury): Negotiations are at present proceeding with the Edinburgh Town Council for the acquisition of a site for the sheriff court house, but I am not yet in a position to state the cost involved. When I am in such a position, I will let the hon. Member know.

Mr. E. BROWN: Will the hon. Member indicate to his right hon. Friend that there is a considerable body of opinion which hopes that the sheriff court will not be moved and that Lord Clyde will withdraw his opposition to the erection of the national library on this site?

Mr. MATHERS: Will the hon. Member indicate to the First Commissioner of Works that there is a body of opinion which believes that the First Commissioner is responsible to some extent for forcing the erection of the library on the George IV Bridge site, and will he take steps to remove that impression from the public mind?

Mr. HARDIE: Since the people of Edinburgh cannot agree, will the right hon. Gentleman consider the removal of the library to Glasgow?

Mr. DUNCAN MILLAR: Will the First Commissioner of Works give an undertaking that no final decision will be arrived at until a fuller expression of opinion has been received from the citizens of Edinburgh?

Mr. PALING: I will convey that request to my right hon. Friend.

Oral Answers to Questions — TAXATION.

Mr. WHITE: 51.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what, at the latest date for which figures are available, was the aggregate annual burden per head of national and local taxes in Great Britain, and in France, Germany, Italy, Holland, and the United States of America, respectively?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I regret that the information is not available in the form in which the hon. Member requires it.

Oral Answers to Questions — SHIPPING (SUBSIDY).

Mr. AYLES: 52.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer if any subsidies out of
public funds are paid to any shipping companies for any purpose; and, if so, whether he can state the amount and for what purpose, and through what Departments of State?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: A sum of £29,000 is provided in the Scottish Office Vote this year as a subsidy towards the cost of the Hebridean Steamer Services. This is the only payment out of public funds that can be described as a shipping subsidy.

Mr. BROCKWAY: Can the right hon. Gentleman say whether a condition is attached to these subsidies by which a living wage must be paid to the workers in the industry?

Mr. SNOWDEN: I think the hon. Member had better address that question to the Secretary of State for Scotland.

Oral Answers to Questions — SURPLUS GOVERNMENT PROPERTY (DISPOSAL).

Brigadier - General CLIFTON BROWN: 54.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer what has been the cost to the Treasury of the Committee he set up over a year ago to report on the sale of surplus Government property; and when is it expected to report?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: The expenditure, inclusive of printing, etc., charges, of the Committee on Government Properties amounts to approximately £25. The Committee reported on the 5th February.

Brigadier-General BROWN: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the cause of the delay on the part of the committee in reporting? Fourteen months have elapsed.

Mr. SNOWDEN: I do not know that there has been any undue delay. There was a great deal of work to be done, and it has necessitated the expenditure of a great deal of time.

Oral Answers to Questions — COMMODITY PRICES.

Mr. BOOTHBY: 55.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he proposes to take any action designed to check the fall in commodity prices?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I fear that I cannot add anything to the reply which I gave to the hon. and gallant Member
for Bethnal Green, North-East (Major Nathan) on the 27th November last, to which I referred the hon. Member on the 2nd December.

Mr. BOOTHBY: Is it not a fact that so long ago as March, 1922, an international conference recommended international action to regulate and economise the use of gold, and does the right hon. Gentleman propose to take steps to summon an international conference to consider this question, which is a matter of international importance?

Mr. SNOWDEN: Yes, and I am aware of the fact that since 1922 a Tory Government has been in office for six years.

Sir A. STEEL-MAITLAND: Is the Chancellor of the Exchequer aware that the withdrawal of gold during the past year has been greater than in any previous year?

Mr. BOOTHBY: Is it not a fact that the fall in prices has been twice as great during the past 18 months as in any previous period?

Oral Answers to Questions — SILVER COINAGE.

Sir W. DAVISON: 56.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether he is aware of many complaints from persons making use of shilling-in-the-slot gas meters for lighting and heating of the serious shortage of shillings, whereby they are inconvenienced in obtaining a regular supply of gas; and whether a larger supply of these coins can be issued to the banks for distribution to the public?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I would refer the hon. Member to the reply which I gave on the 22nd January to the hon. and gallant Member for East Fulham (Sir K. Vaughan-Morgan).

Sir W. DAVISON: Does the right hon. Gentleman not think that it would be a profitable transaction for the State at the present time, in view of the very low price of silver, to mint, an additional number of shillings when there is such a public demand for them?

Mr. SNOWDEN: As I stated last week, the Mint are taking this matter into consideration.

Oral Answers to Questions — MISCELLANEOUS REVENUE.

Captain P. MACDONALD: 57.
asked the Chancellor of the Exchequer whether any funds have been left over as a residue of War-time financial operations; and are such resources available for Budget purposes?

Mr. P. SNOWDEN: I would refer the hon. Member to the summarised statement on page 25 of Finance Accounts for 1929–30 and to the detailed statements on pages 32 and 33, from which he will see that there are numerous War-time transactions not yet completely liquidated, the receipts from which are included in the Budget as Miscellaneous Revenue. Apart from Reparations and the Clearing Office, Enemy Debts, the amounts are relatively small.

Captain MACDONALD: Can the right hon. Gentleman say what is the amount?

Mr. SNOWDEN: It is reckoned that out of a sum of £26,000,000, roughly, about £23,000,000 comes from the Reparations and Enemy Debts (Clearing Office).

Oral Answers to Questions — COMMISSIONS AND COMMITTEES.

Mr. ALBERY: 58.
asked the Financial Secretary to the Treasury how many departmental committees and Royal Commissions have been set up by the present Government, and how many have submitted a report?

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence): The appointment of 72 commissions and committees has been announced since the present Government took office. Fourteen of these are standing bodies. Of the remainder 18 have reported.

Major COLVILLE: Can the hon. Member say how many of these reports have been acted upon? Have they all shared the fate of the Simon Commission report?

Oral Answers to Questions — CONTINENTAL ARMIES.

Major GLYN: 50.
asked the Secretary of State for War what is the established peace strength of the armies of France, Italy, Poland, Yugoslavia, and Rumania; what reserves have each of these countries; and how do these figures compare with February, 1915.

Mr. SHAW: I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the information published in the League of Nations Armaments Year Book. As regards 1915, I regret that figures are not available.

Major GLYN: Will the right hon. Gentleman send me a copy of the book?

Mr. SHAW: I think the hon. and gallant Member will find one in the Library.

Major GLYN: Cannot I have one sent to me in the ordinary way? I understood that when right hon. Members refer to books of reference of that kind, a copy is usually sent.

Mr. SHAW: I do not think that I can guarantee to send to hon. Members copies of the books to which I refer them, especially when a copy is in the Library.

Major HARVEY: Is the right hon. Gentleman a member of the League of Nations Union?

Mr. SHAW: Yes, Sir.

Oral Answers to Questions — POST OFFICE (WIRES AND CABLES).

Mr. DAY: 67.
asked the Postmaster-General the approximate mileage of overhead telephone and telegraph wires that are at present in use by the Post Office; and can he give the figures of the substitution of the same by underground cables that has taken place in the 12 months ended to the last convenient date?

The ASSISTANT POSTMASTER-GENERAL (Mr. Viant): Approximately 1,300,000 miles of overhead wires are at present in use; and 27,500 miles of overhead wires were recovered during the year ended 30th September last. The total mileage of underground wires is 7,600,000.

Mr. DAY: In view of the unemployment which exists, could not this work be expedited?

Oral Answers to Questions — COTTON INDUSTRY (DISPUTE).

Mr. HAMMERSLEY: 70.
asked the Minister of Labour whether she will make it a condition of Government participation in negotiations connected -with the dispute in the cotton trade that all official bodies representing employers and
employed shall be armed with full authority to negotiate on all questions affecting the reorganisation of the industry?

The MINISTER of LABOUR (Miss Bondfield): No, Sir. The Government must keep a free hand to take any action which seems likely to promote a settlement.

Mr. HAMMERSLEY: Can we be sure that the right hon. Lady appreciates the fact that there are many matters to investigate other than the question of more looms per weaver, and would it not be futile to enter into these negotiations when the people with whom the Government intend to negotiate are not in a position to deliver the goods?

Mr. SANDHAM: Is the right hon. Lady aware of the fact that a very large majority ballot vote in Lancashire against negotiation makes it absolutely imperative for the Government to move on the lines of a national control board?

Mr. WISE: May I ask whether it is not the case that the workers' representatives in these negotiations have been pressing for reorganisation of the industry as an alternative to wage reduction?

Oral Answers to Questions — IRAQ (PIPE LINE).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 72.
asked the Under-Secretary of State for the Colonies whether he can now make a statement regarding the proposed Iraq pipe-line?

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for the COLONIES (Dr. Drummond Shiels): Negotiations are still in progress between the Iraq Petroleum Company and the Government of Iraq, and I am not in a position to say whether any agreement has been reached. The company has negotiated a formal agreement with the Governments of Palestine and Trans-Jordan in regard to the conditions on which it will be allowed to construct a pipe-line through those territories, but the decision as to construction must obviously depend upon the outcome of the negotiations with Iraq.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: What does the Under-Secretary mean by saying that he is not in a position to say whether any agreement has been reached? Is it not
a matter of interest to His Majesty's Government that an agreement should be reached on certain definite lines?

Dr. SHIELS: What I meant was that so far as I know an agreement has not been reached, as negotiatons are still in progress.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Is the hon. Member watching the situation closely from the point of view of our Imperial interests?

Dr. SHIELS: The Department with which I am associated has always in mind the interests of the Empire.

Mr. HARDIE: Have the Government any financial commitments in connection with this pipe-line?

Dr. SHIELS: No, Sir.

Oral Answers to Questions — EARL HAIG STATUE.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: 73.
asked the First Commissioner of Works if he will undertake that the amended model of the Earl Haig statue will not be adopted until Lady Haig, the British Legion, and the Houses of Parliament have been consulted and have signified their approval?

Mr. PALING: I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply which was given in this House on the 4th instant, to the hon. Member for Chislehurst (Mr. Smithers).

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: Will the hon. Member represent to his right hon. Friend that the confidence of the people of this country in regard to the judgment of the assessors has been severely shaken, while the people mentioned in the question are the best qualified to give an expert judgment?

Mr. SMITHERS: On a point of Order. In the answer that has been given reference is made to a question which I put upon this subject. May I ask a supplementary question upon that?

Mr. SPEAKER: I do not think the hon. Member is entitled to ask a supplementary question on an answer given on a previous day.

Oral Answers to Questions — BOTANIC GARDENS.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: 74.
asked the First Commissioner of Works if he can yet indicate what is to be the future of the Botanic Gardens when the Crown lease falls in early in 1932?

Mr. PALING: I would refer the hon. and gallant Member to the reply to a similar question on the 11th November last. The matter is still under consideration.

Lieut.-Colonel MOORE: Is this House to assume that within one year of this very valuable and historic property falling in the Government have absolutely no idea in their heads as to what use it is going to be put?

Mr. PALING: The reply says that the matter is under consideration.

Oral Answers to Questions — CANADA (DEPORTATIONS).

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 19.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether any other Dominions besides Canada has deported British subjects on the ground that they had become, or were likely to become, a public charge; and, if so, will he give the figures?

Mr. THOMAS: The Commonwealth Immigration Act authorises the deportation of persons not born in Australia who, within three years after arrival in Australia, have become inmates of a public charitable institution, but I understand that deportation under this provision has been in practice mainly confined to individuals suffering from a mental or physical disease which renders them incapable of employment. I have no information as to the number of eases in which deportation under this provision has taken place in recent years, but I have no reason to think that it is considerable. Apart from this the answer to the hon. Member's question is in the negative.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Does His Majesty's Government take any reciprocal action in similar circumstances?

Mr. THOMAS: No. We set a good example to all the other Governments.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: 20.
asked the Secretary of State for Dominion Affairs whether his attention has been called to
the action of the Canadian Government in deporting from Canada a number of British persons, some of whom had children born in that Dominion; whether he will give the full facts and figures in relation to this matter; and whether any representations have been made to the Canadian Government?

Mr. THOMAS: I presume that the hon. Member refers to the recent deportation from Canada of 107 British subjects on the S.S. "Ascania." I find on inquiry that of these 96 had become public charges, nine had been convicted, and one was a tubercular subject. In the remaining case, no particulars have yet been received. Of the whole number, five were Canadian-born children, 64 were assisted migrants and 38 had proceeded to Canada without assistance. I understand that all these persons were liable to deportation under the Canadian Immigration Law, with the exception of the five children who were born in the Dominion. These children, like all Canadian-born children, were not liable to deportation, but, being of tender years, accompanied their parents back to this country. In reply to the last part of the hon. Member's question I have this subject under consideration.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: Seeing that these British subjects, who were deported from Canada, have been guilty of no crime or irregularity whatsoever, will representations be made to the Canadian Government that this is hardly an evidence of Imperial unity?

Mr. T. WILLIAMS: Has my right hon. Friend any power to reciprocate, and, if so, will he consider the advisability of deporting, say, Lord Beaverbrook?

Mr. THOMAS: In a case of that kind much would depend upon whether the House as a whole felt that such action was in the public interest.

Mr. MUGGERIDGE: May I ask whether one of the cases was not that of a woman who had been married in Canada, who was taken away from her children and husband, was landed at Liverpool without a penny piece in her pocket, and was subjected to all sorts of indignities on the way?

Mr. THOMAS: I have no knowledge of that case. Much as one will deplore these facts, it would be equally a mistake for me to condemn wholesale without the facts being fully known. I must not be taken as accepting my hon. Friend's definition.

Mr. HORE-BELISHA: What arrangements are the Government making for these people, seeing that they are not eligible for unemployment benefit?

Mr. THOMAS: The hon. Gentleman must be aware that we could not introduce a special Act of Parliament because of this abnormal situation, but these facts clearly demonstrate the difficulty, that normally each year there are thousands going to our Dominions, but you see this frustrated by many returning.

BUSINESS OF THE HOUSE.

Motion made, and Question put,
That the Proceedings on the China Indemnity (Application) Bill be exempted, at this day's Sitting, from the provisions of the Standing Order (Sittings of the House)."—[The Prime Minister.]

The House divided: Ayes, 266; Noes, 143.

Division No. 136.]
AYES.
[3.47 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Blindell, James
Chater, Daniel


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Cluse, W. S.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Broad, Francis Alfred
Cocks, Frederick Seymour


Alpass, J. H.
Brockway, A. Fenner
Compton, Joseph


Arnott, John
Bromfield, William
Cove, William G.


Aske, Sir Robert
Bromley, J.
Cripps, Sir Stafford


Attlee, Clement Richard
Brooke, W.
Dagger, George


Ayles, Walter
Brothers, M.
Dallas, George


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Dalton, Hugh


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)


Barnes, Alfred John
Buchanan, G.
Day, Harry


Barr, James
Burgess, F. G.
Dudgeon, Major C. R


Batey, Joseph
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Dukes, C.


Bellamy, Albert
Cameron, A. G.
Duncan, Charles


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Cape, Thomas
Ede, James Chuter


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Edmunds, J. E.


Benson, G.
Charleton, H. C.
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)


Egan, W. H.
Lees, J.
salter, Dr. Alfred


Elmley, Viscount
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Foot, Isaac
Logan, David Gilbert
Sanders, W. S.


Forgan, Dr. Robert
Longbottom, A. W.
Sandham, E.


Freeman, Peter
Longden, F.
Sawyer, G. F.


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Lunn, William
Scott, James


Gibbins, Joseph
Macdonald Gordon (Ince)
Scrymgeour, E.


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Scurr, John


Gill, T. H.
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Sexton, Sir James


Gillett, George M.
McElwee, A.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Glassey, A. E.
McEntee, V. L.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Gossling, A. G.
McKinlay, A.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Gould, F.
MacLaren, Andrew
Shield, George William


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Granville, E.
Maclean, Neil (Glasgow, Govan)
Shillaker, J. F.


Gray, Milner
MacNeill-Weir, L.
Shinwell, E.


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).
Macpherson, Rt. Hen. James I.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mcshane, John James
Simmons, C. J.


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Malone, C. L'Estrangs (N'thampton)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Groves, Thomas E.
Mansfield, W.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhlthe)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Marcus, M.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Markham, S. F.
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Hall, G. H. (Morthyr Tydvil)
Marley, J.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Marshall, Fred
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Mathers, George
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Matters, L. W.
Snell, Harry


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Maxton, James
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Phillp


Hardle, George D.
Melville, Sir James
Sorensen, R.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Messer, Fred
Stamford, Thomas W.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Middleton, G.
Stephen, Campbell


Haycock, A. W.
Millar, J. D.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Hayday, Arthur
Mills, J. E.
Sullivan, J.


Hayes, John Henry
Montague, Frederick
Sutton, J. E.


Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Morley, Ralph
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Thorne, W. (West Ham. Plalstow)


Herriotts, J.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Thurtle, Ernest


Hirst, G. H. (York, W. R.,Wentworth)
Mort, D. L.
Tinker, John Joseph


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Toole, Joseph


Hoffman, P. C.
Muff, G.
Tout, W. J.


Hopkin, Daniel
Muggerldge, H. T.
Townend, A. E.


Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Murnin, Hugh
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Horrabin, J. F.
Naylor, T. E.
Vaughan, David


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Viant, S. P.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Noel Baker, P. J.
Walker, J.


Hutchison, Maj. Gen. Sir R.
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Wallace, H. W.


Isaacs, George
Oldfield, J. R.
Walters, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Tudor


Jenkins, Sir William
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Watkins, F. C.


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Palln, John Henry
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Jones, Rt. Hon. Lelf (Camborne)
Palmer, E. T.
Wellock, Wilfred


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Perry, S. F.
West, F. R.


Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Westwood, Joseph


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
White, H. G.


Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Kinley, J.
Pole, Major D. G.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Kirkwood, D.
Potts, John S.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Knight, Holford
Price, M. P.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Lanq, Gordon
Pybus, Percy John
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Atterellfe)


Lathan, G.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Raynes, W. R.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Richards, R.
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester, Loughb'sh)


Lawrence, Susan
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wise, E. F


Lawrle, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Rlley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Lawson, John James
Rlley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Romeril, H. G.



Leach, W.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Rothschild, J. de
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Rowson, Guy



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bird, Ernest Roy
Brown, Brig.-Gen. H.C. (Berks,Newb'y)


Albery, Irving James
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Bullock, Captain Malcolm


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Burton, Colonel H. W.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Boyce, Leslie
Butler, R. A.


Balniel, Lord
Braithwalte, Major A. N.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward


Beaumont, M. W.
Brass, Captain Sir William
Campbell, E. T.


Bellalrs, Commander Carlyon
Briscoe. Richard George
Castle Stewart, Earl of


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Brown, Col. D.C (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Cautley, Sir Henry S.




Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R.(Prtsmth,S.)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Haslam, Henry C.
Salmon, Major I.


Chapman, Sir S.
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Christie, J. A.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Cohen, Major J. Brunei
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Savery, S. S.


Colman, N. C. D.
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Colville, Major D. J.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Skeiton, A. N.


Cranborne, Viscount
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hurd, Percy A.
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Klnc'dine, C.


Crookshank,Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Galnsbro)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Smithers, Waldron


Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Somerset, Thomas


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Davison, Sir w. H. (Kensington, S.)
Lewie, Oswald (Colchester)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Eden, Captain Anthony
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Steel-Maitland. Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Edmondson, Major A. J.
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s-M.)
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Everard, W. Lindsay
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Tinne, J. A.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Marjoribanks, Edward
Titchfield. Major the Marquess of


Ferguson, Sir John
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Flson, F. G. Clavering
Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Train, J.


Ford, Sir P. J.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Muirhead, A. J.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Fremantie, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld)
Wardlaw-Mllne, J. S.


Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Nleld, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Warrender, Sir Victor


Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
O'Neill, Sir H.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Wells, Sydney R.


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Penny, Sir George
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Purbrick, R.
Womersley, W. J.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Reynolds, Col. Sir James



Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Hammersley, S. S.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Sir Frederick Thomson and Captain


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Euan Wallace.

METROPOLITAN POLICE (STAFF SUPERANNUATION AND POLICE FUND) BILL.

Reported, without Amendment, from Standing Committee B.

Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Minutes of the Proceedings of the Standing Committee to be printed.

Bill, not amended (in the Standing Committee), to be taken into consideration upon Thursday.

PUBLIC ACCOUNTS.

First Report from the Select Committee brought up, and read; Report to lie upon the Table, and to be printed.

Orders of the Day — AGRICULTURAL LAND (UTILISATION) BILL.

As amended (in the Standing Committee), further considered.

CLAUSE 19.—(Interpretation and construction.)

The MINISTER of AGRICULTURE (Dr. Addison): I beg to move, in page 18, line 14, to leave out from the word "unincorporated" to the word "and" in line 17.
It will be seen that in the Clause as it stands the word "Society" is defined as including any body of persons whether incorporated or unincorporated, but the Clause adds that it shall not include:
any body of persons whose funds or any portion of whose funds are used for political purposes.
These words were inserted in Committee and when the Amendment to include them was moved in Committee I think we were getting on rather well, and I was, perhaps, in an even better temper than usual. At all events, I accepted the Amendment, but I find, upon going into the matter, that my good nature in doing so would involve me in accounting difficulties in connection with this matter, and therefore I must now ask the House to support me in moving to omit these words. The reason is this: The grant that we make to the allotment society is not made to the society as such at all; it is made in respect of the requirements for seeds, fertilisers and so on, and I may say that Sir William Waterlow's Committee, which is handling this matter for us, is devoting a great deal of time and attention to the work, and I shall have, I think, the approval of everybody when I say a word of appreciation on the Third Reading.
The whole point in regard to this Amendment is that these grants are really not made to the societies; they are made in respect of the members who receive so many thousand potatoes, so many packets of seeds, this, that and the other. The whole lot are added up, and the Waterlow Committee supplies the goods. That is what it comes to. If these words were in the Bill, and it
were a statutory obligation upon us to inquire of every particular allotment society as to whether it had or had not given a subscription to any other body which might or might not have given a subscription for political purposes, we should find ourselves involved in rather a large inquiry as to what the society did with their other money. All we are concerned with in this Clause is to see that the money we supply is used solely for these seeds, fertilisers, etc. No money can be paid except in respect to these requirements, but I suggest that it is putting upon the Minister an obligation very difficult to discharge if he has to inquire what every allotment society does with any of its other funds. It would make the Clause largely unworkable, or, at all events, involve cumbersome machinery not necessary for our purpose, and which is outside the object of the Bill, namely, the proper supply of seeds and fertilisers where required. I see the hon. Member for Torquay (Mr. C. Williams) is on the look out, but I can assure him that none of these funds can find their way to any purpose except that provided for under the Clause, and I hope, in these circumstances, the House will support me in this Amendment.

Mr. CHARLES WILLIAMS: Of all the backsliders I have come across, the Minister is absolutely the worst. Not only is he a backslider, but he is self-contradictory, because in Committee upstairs, when he accepted the Amendment, he said:
I am advised that the Clause would be quite workable with these words included."—[OFFICIAL REPORT (Standing Committee B), 16th December, 1930; col. 587.]
So that, quite obviously, his claim that this is not easy of administration goes by the board. It is quite easy.

Dr. ADDISON: I was only able to get advice in Committee for a minute or two, and on further consideration it was found that unforeseen difficulties of administration would be likely to arise. I am sorry that it is necessary for me to go back on what I provisionally accepted in Committee.

Mr. WILLIAMS: It is no good backsliding, and then apologising. I would, however, take it from another point of view. He said that these seeds and fertilisers are really given to the allotment
holder himself. That is perfectly true, but it is the administration by the societies about which we are quarrelling. That is why we want them to be of a non-political character. When we were in Committee upstairs, I moved the original Amendment. The Minister had considerable time in which to discuss it and consider it. The Department laid it down on that occasion that these words were necessary in the Bill, and the Minister accepted the Amendment with a very slight alteration. Then one or two Members in different parts of the Committee began to And difficulties. The Minister still said he had to accept the words, and merely added that he would inquire into the matter between then and the Report stage.
Where you have a Clause about which there is a great deal of common agreement, and where practically every section of the Committee did much to help the Minister in getting the Clause through, it is rather rough when it comes to a question of this kind, in which we want to give the people administering these funds the widest power possible, that politics should not be kept out of consideration. I do not think that any hon. Member from any side would wish to do otherwise when he realises the very good work that these societies are doing. Many of them are giving their work without any financial help. Here you are asking them to extend their work. There are men of every party in these societies, and they are working with common good will. We wish to help the societies in every way, but the House would be very badly advised to accept the Amendment of the Minister, because he has got a few excellent words in this part of the Bill which will add enormously to the easy working powers of the Bill. In such circumstances, surely the Minister is not going to insist upon having these words withdrawn Will he look at it from a rather different point of view? He has

not made out any case of very great difficulty to-day. He is laying up for himself, at some other time, perhaps, a more difficult position, and if only from the point of view of helping the easy working and the clean administration of the Bill, I would ask him to reconsider his position, and not insist upon taking out these words, which undoubtedly met with a great deal of good will from all sections of the Committee upstairs.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Hon. Members on this side will, I think, regret the action of the Minister in endeavouring to take out on the Report stage what he inserted in Committee. We shall certainly challenge this in the Division Lobby, because this is undoubtedly the least controversial section of the Bill. It is agreed that allotments in this country have done nothing but good, and so far, at any rate, the allotment societies have been most helpful and entirely free from political discrimination. We want to safeguard the future. Where Government money is being expended, there should not grow up any political distinction in administration, and this is the very best way to guard against that danger, for there is a danger in certain areas with predominant political opinion on one side or the other, that favouritism will be shown in a society, and if you are to give to all sorts of societies which are formed for purely social and philanthropic purposes the power to contribute to political parties, you are destroying a very valuable Amendment. Because we want to safeguard that position, we attach great importance to these words. We do not believe that the difficulty in administration would be great, and it is a safeguard to which we attach importance.

Question put, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 159; Noes, 266.

Division No. 137.]
AYES.
[4.12 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Bird, Ernest Roy
Bullock, Captain Malcolm


Albery, Irving James
Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Barton, Colonel H. W.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Bowater, Col. Sir T. V[...]
Butler, R. A.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Boyce, Leslle
Campbell, E. T.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Cattle Stewart, Earl of


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Brass, Captain sir William
Cautley, Sir Henry S.


Balniel, Lord
Briscoe, Richard George
Cayzer, Maj.Sir Harbt. R.(Prtsmth,S.)


Beaumont, M. W.
Brown, Col D. C.(N'th'ld., Hexham)
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.


Bellalrs, Commander Carlyon
Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks,Newb'y)
Chapman, Sir S.


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Buchan, John
Christie. J. A.


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Hope, the Harry (For[...])
Russell, Alexander West (Tynamouth)


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Horne, Rt. Hon. Sir Robert S.
Salmon, Major I.


Colman, N. O. D.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham


Colville, Major D. J.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Cranborne, Vissount
Hurd, Percy A.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Crichton-Stuart, Lord [...].
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. sir R.
Savery, S. S.


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Iveagh, Countess of
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Crookshank,cpt. H.(Lindsey, [...])
Knox, Sir Alfred
Skelton, A. N.


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Lamb, Sir J. O.
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S Molton)
Smith, R.W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Dairymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Smith-Carington, Nevllie W.


Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Lewis, Oswald (colchester)
Smithers, Waldren


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Somerset, Thomas


Dawson, Sir Philip
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)
Somerville, A. A. (Windser)


Dixon Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Somerville, B. G. (Willesden, East)


Dugdals, Capt. T. L.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Eden, Captain Anthony
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Edmendson, Major A. J.
Marjoribanks, Edward
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Elliot, Major Walter E.
Millar, J. D.
Steel-Maitland, at. Hon. Sir Arthur


Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s.-M.)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. E.


Everard, W. Lindsay
Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Ferguson, Sir John
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. B. (Ayr)
Thomson, Sir F.


Fielden, E. B.
Muirhead, A. J.
Tinne, J. A.


Fison, F. G. Clavering
Murnin, Hugh
Titchfield, Major the Marquees of


Ford, Sir P. J.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Nicholson, Col-Rt. Hn. W.G.([...])
Train, J.


Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
O'Neill, Sir H.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Ward, Lieut.-Col Sir A. Lambert


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Wardlaw-Milpe, J. S.


Grattan-Doyle. Sir N.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Beven, Barnstaple)
Warrender, Sir Victor


Gretton. Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Power, Sir John Cecil
Wayland, Sir William A.


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Purbrick, R.
Wells, Sydney, R.


Gunston, Captain D. W.
Ramsbotham, H.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Ferquay)


Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglss H.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambidge U.)


Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Rentoul, Sir Gervals s.
Womersley, W. J.


Hammersley, S. S.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley.


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Haslam, Henry C.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur [...].
Ross, Major Ronald D.



Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Rothschild, J. de
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Hills, Major Rt. HOR. John Waller
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Captain Sir George Bowyer and




Sir George Penny.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Cluse, W. S.
Grundy, Thomas W.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Clynes, Rt. Hon John R.
Hall, F. (York, W. R., Normanton)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Compton, Joseph
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)


Alpass, J. H.
Cove, William G.
Halt, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Arnott, John
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Hamilton. Mary Agnes (Blackburn)


Aske, Sir Robert
Dagger, George
Hamilton, sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Dallas, George
Hardle, George D.


Ayles, Walter
Dalton, Hugh
Hartahorn Rt. Hon. Vernce


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Day, Harry
Haycock, A. W.


Barnes, Alfred John
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Haydey, Arthur


Barr, James
Dukes, C.
Hayes, John Henry


Batey, Joseph
Duncan, Charles
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)


Bellamy, Albert
Ede, James Chuter
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Bennett, Sir E. N. ([...] Central)
Edmunds, J. E.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Benson, G.
Egan, W. H.
Herriotts, J.


Blindell, James
Elmley, Viscount
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Went worth)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Foot, Isaac
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Forgan, Dr. Robert
Hoffman, P. C.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Freeman, Peter
Hopkin, Daniel


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gardoes, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie


Bromfield, William
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Horrabin, J. F.


Bromley, J.
Gibbins, Joseph
Hudson, James H. (Huddessfield)


Brooke, W.
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs. Mossley)
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Brothers. M.
Gill, T. H.
Isaacs, George


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Glassey, A. E.
Jeskins, Sir William


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Gossling, A. G.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Buchanan, G.
Gould, F.
Johnston, Thomas


Burgess, F. G.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merloneth)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Granville, E.
Jones, Rt. Hon, Leif (Camborne)


Cameron, A. G.
Gray, Milner
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Cape, Thomas
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Garter, W. (St. Pancras, S. W.)
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)


Charleton, H. C.
Grimths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)


Chater, Daniel
Groves, Thomas E.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas




Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Kinley, J.
Mort, D. L.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Kirkwood, D.
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Knight, Holford
Muff, G.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Lang, Gordon
Muggeridge, H. T.
Smith, Tom (Pontetract)


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Murnin, Hugh
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Lathan, G.
Naylor, T. E.
Snell, Harry


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Sorensen, R.


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Stamford, Thomas W.


Lawson, John James
Oldfield, J. R.
Stephen, Campbell


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Leach, W.
Palln, John Henry
Sullivan, J.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Paling, Wilfrid
Sutton, J. E.


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Palmer, E. T.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Lees, J.
Perry, S. F.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistow)


Logan, David Gilbert
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Thurtle, Ernest


Longbottom, A. W.
Pole, Major D. G.
Tinker, John Joseph


Longden, F.
Potts, John S.
Toole, Joseph


Lunn, William
Price, M. P.
Tout, W. J.


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Townend, A. E.


MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R.(Seaham)
Rathbone, Eleanor
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Raynes, W. R.
Vaughan, David


McElwee, A
Richards, R.
Viant, S. P.


McEntee, V. L.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Walker, J.


McKinlay, A.
Rilcy, Ben (Dewsbury)
Wallace, H. W.


MacLaren, Andrew
Rlley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Walters, Rt. Hon. Sir J. Tudor


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Ritson, J.
Watkins, F.C.


Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Romeril, H. G.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermilne)


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondds)


McShane, John James
Rowson, Guy
Wellock, Wilfred


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
West, F. R.


Mansfield, W.
Sanders, W. S.
Westwood, Joseph


Marcus, M.
Sandham, E.
White, H. G.


Markham, S. F.
Sawyer, G. F.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Marley, J.
Scott, James
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Marshall, Fred
Scrymgeour, E.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Mathers, George
Scurr, John
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Lianelly)


Matters, L. W.
Sexton, Sir James
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Maxton, James
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercllffe)


Melville, Sir James
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Messer, Fred
Shepherd, Arthur Lewls
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Middleton, G.
Sherwood, G. H.
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Mills. J. E.
Shield, George William
Wise, E. F.


Milner, Major J.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Wood, Major McKenzle (Banff)


Montague, Frederick
Shillaker, J. F.
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Morley, Ralph
Shinwell, E.



Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Simmons, C. J.
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Charles Edwards.


Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)

Captain BOURNE: I beg to move, in page 18, line 19, at the end, to insert the words:
Unemployed in relation to a person means whose name is entered in the unemployment register.
One of the difficulties which we had in the Committee stage was to get some definition of "unemployed." Roughly speaking, when we discuss unemployment, the general feeling is that what we mean by unemployed persons are those unfortunate individuals whose names appear in the weekly list of the Ministry of Labour. Practically every person is on that register, irrespective of whether or not he is entitled to unemployment benefit. The reason for that is that before the operation of the Local Government Act, the boards of guardians had laid it down as a condition of granting relief that a
person should register as unemployed. The Ministry of Labour informed me in an answer to a question that the effect of the new Act in England was that there was an increase in the number of people on the register. There is reason to believe that all the unemployed in this country are registered at Employment Exchanges, although many of them are not entitled to benefit. Therefore, some definition of "unemployed" is wanted. The whole object of this part of the Bill which deals with allotments and smallholdings is to give jobs to the unemployed. It is an unemployment relief Measure rather than an agricultural Measure, and we feel that we cannot get a better definition than that an unemployed person is one who is registered at an Employment Exchange. I cannot see any hardship—

Mr. PALIN: What about the agricultural labourer; he is not registered?

Captain BOURNE: He is covered under another Clause and under a new Clause which was inserted in Committee. In addition, there is nothing to stop the agricultural labourer registering himself if he is out of work. It is true that he cannot get benefit, but that does not prevent him registering himself. If anybody wants to claim relief as an unemployed man under this Bill it is not asking too much that he should register as an unemployed man.

Lieut.-Colonel RUGGLES-BRISE: I beg to Second the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: We discussed in Committee the fact that we have not put a definition of "unemployed" in the Bill, and I think that I succeeded in convincing the Committee that it was a wise proceeding, because in different Acts there are definitions of the word, which are by no means the same. In this particular case, the proposed definition is that he should be a person who is registered as unemployed at an Employment Exchange, and the remark of the hon. and gallant Member with regard to the agricultural labourer does not quite cover it. In Clause 7, it is true, the agricultural worker is in the same position as if he were unemployed with regard to the provision of a smallholding, but in this particular case the difficulty might arise that an agricultural worker might take over an allotment and have to go to a town two or three miles away to register. It will be easy to ascertain whether or not a man is unemployed, and I cannot see any advantage in inserting this definition. There would be inquiry into a man's bona fides by those in charge of the local administration, who will have means of finding out whether a person is unemployed. I do not think we need go beyond that.

Major ELLIOT: The Minister has not met the point, and I doubt if he has fully understood it. His suggestion is that a man merely has to state that he is unemployed, but our suggestion is that he only need go to an Exchange and sign a register.

Mr. PALIN: You are trying to put the unemployed man to as much inconvenience as you can.

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member is continually interrupting, and his interruptions show that he has not grasped any of the points we are discussing. He brings forward the suggestion that this is an attempt to put the unemployed man to inconvenience. It is the Government's proposal which will do that. The Minister has used the phrase "bona fide," that is to say, genuinely seeking work. That is what he stands for. We stand for the perfectly simple test whether a man is registered. The Minister also stands for the local administration holding an inquiry into cases, and he says that it will be easy to ascertain whether a man is unemployed. Does he think that that will ease the case of the unemployed?

Mr. PALIN: Nonsense.

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member, when challenged, is unable to substantiate any of the assertions that he makes. The Minister prides himself that he was able to convince the Committee. He was not able to do that. He voted the Opposition down, as a Government can do, but he did not convince the Committee. He got his own way by saying that he would assume on his own shoulders the whole of this administrative responsibility—a very rash thing to do. He will delay the operation of his own Measure by this refusal. He will place an inquisition upon those applying for assistance under the Bill, but our simple proposal would obviate that. The Minister puts his objection to this proposal on the ground that it interferes with his administrative discretion, and he contends that it does not place any difficulties in the way of the unemployed man. The proof of the pudding is in the eating, and, after the administrative tangle to which these proposals will lead, the Minister will be obliged to come to this House asking for an amending Bill in order to get himself out of his own difficulties. In those circumstances, I am sure he will be sorry that he did not accept this Amendment. We have another proposal to bring for' ward later on which it would not be in order for me to discuss now, and which deals with this special point. Under the Bill as it stands, the Minister has to decide this question, and he has to decide who is and who is not an agricultural worker. The Minister has to decide this
question by his own administrative discretion, and that is a position from which we ask the House to rescue him.

Colonel ASHLEY: I hope the tight hon. Gentleman will reconsider his decision. We have proposed this Amendment after making considerable inquiries, and we ate assured that if a Man is unemployed, according to our Amendment, he is eligible under this Bill. According to this Measure, as I read it, if the Amendment of my hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Oxford (Captain Bourne) it net inserted, any man who was not genuinely unemployed might benefit. We are anxious to relieve the Minister of Agriculture of unnecessary inquiries.

Dr. ADDISON: It is a matter of convenience that this point should be arranged as is provided for in the Bill. The Amendment proposed by the hon. and gallant Gentleman opposite would make a tremendous amount of unecessary work.

Colonel ASHLEY: On the contrary, I think this Amendment would avoid a great deal of unnecessary inquiry and expense. If a person puts down his name wrongly, then the Minister is free to make inquiries.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: I am in some difficulty in regard to this question. I think the Minister could very easily build on this Amendment a very considerable improvement in the Bill. The Amendment we are discussing is a simple and easy rule to be adopted in regard to people who are out of work. I am in agreement with my hon. and gallant Friend's proposal, although it does not

achieve all that I want. I think the Amendment would be rather hard on fishermen living in a small fishing village far away from an Employment, Exchange, because they could not be expected to go such a long distance in order to register themselves as Unemployed. That is not a reasonable thing to ask fishermen to do in those circumstances. All the fishermen living in a fishing village might be very desirous to have allotments on the terms provided for in this Bill. That is a single illustration but I could give many instances from Scotland where the people live four miles away from the place where they would have to register. If this Amendment could be amended in such a way as to enable people engaged in the fishing industry to be considered on separate lines, then it would be a very good proposal The Amendment is all right froth the point of view of those who live close to the Employment Exchanges, but it is not convenient for those who live in districts far away from the Exchanges. I recognise that there is something in what the Minister of Agriculture has Said in regard to this Amendment, but I think by suggesting the possibility of adjusting this matter in another place the Minister has done something Very foolish. Between the proposal of the Minister and the Amendment of my hon. and gallant Friend I am in rather a difficult position, but I shall vote for the least foolish of the two proposals.

Question put, "That those herds be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 170; Noes, 268.

Division No. 138.]
AYES.
[4.39 p.m.


Acland, Troyte, Lieut.- Colonel
Briscoe, Richard George
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, west)


Albery, Irving James
Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Cunllffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Phillp


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leepold C. M. S.
Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks,Newb'y)
balkeith, Earl of


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Buchan, John
Dalrymple-White Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Davies, Maj. Geo. F:(Somerset,Yeovil)


Atkinson, C.
Butler, R. A.
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Dawson, Sir Philip


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Campbell, E. T.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Castle Stewart, Earl of
Duck worth, G. A. V.


Balniel, Lord
Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.


Beaumont, M. W.
Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Eden, Captain Anthony


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Cayzer, Maj Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmith.s.)
Edmondson, Major A. S.


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Elliot, Major Walter E.


B[...]chall, Major Sir John Dearman
Champman, Sir S.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Westont-s-M.)


Bird, Ernest Roy
Christle, J. A.
Everard, W. Lindsay


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Bowater, Captain Robert Croft
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Ferguson, Sir John


Bowater, Captain sir George E. W.
Colman, N. C. D.
Fermoy, Lord


Boyce, Leslie
Cranborne, Viscount
Fielden, E. B.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Fison, F. G. Clavering



Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Ford, Sir P J.


Forestier-Walker, Sir L.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Smith-Carington, Neville) W.


Galbraith, J. F. W.
Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W
Smithers, Waldron


Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Somerset, Thomas


Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Ottey)
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Muirhead, A. J.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Gritten, W. G. Howard
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn.W. G.(Ptrsf'ld)
Steel-Maltland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Nield, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Gunston, Captain D. W.
O'Neill, Sir H.
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.


Hamilton, Sir George (Ilford)
Peake, Capt. Osbert
Thomas, Major L. B. (king's Norton)


Hammersley, S. S.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Thomson, Sir F.


Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Peto, sir Basll E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Tinne, J. A.


Haslam, Henry C.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Power, Sir John Cecil
Train, J.


Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Purbrick, R.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Ramsbotham, H.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Rentoul, Sir Gervai[...] S.
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Hurd, Percy A.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Warrender, Sir Victor


Iveagh, Countess of
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Wayland, Sir William A.


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gten)
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Renneil
Wells, Sydney R.


Knox, Sir Alfred
Ross, Major Ronald D.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Lamb, Sir J. O.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Salmon, Major I.
Womersley, W. J.


Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Long, Major Hon. Eric
Sandeman, Sir M. Stewart
Worthington-Evans; Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Lyttington, Viscount
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Wright, Brig;-Gen; W. O. (Tavist'k)


McConnell, Sir Joseph
Savery, S. S.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome



Margesson, Captain M. D.
Skelton, A. N.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Marjoribanks, Edward
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallan)
Sir George Penny and Major the


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kitc'dlne, C.)
Marquess of Titchfield.


NOES.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Day, Harry
Herriotte, J.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Dukes, C.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Alpass, J. H.
Duncan, Charles
Hoffman, P. C.


Arnott, John
Ede, James Chuter
Hopkin, Daniel


Aske, Sir Robert
Edmunds, J. E.
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie


Attlee, Clement Richard
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Horrabin, J. F.


Ayles, Walter
Egan, W. H.
Hudson, James M. (Huddersfield)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Elmley, Viscount
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
England, Colonel A.
Hutchison, Maj-Gen. Sir R.


Barnes, Alfred John
Foot, Isaac
Isaace, George


Barr, James
Forgan, Dr. Robert
Jankins, Sir William


Batey, Joseph
Freeman, peter
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Bellamy, Albert
Gardner, S. W. (West Ham. Upton)
Johnston, Thomas


Bennett, sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Gibbins, Joseph
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Benson, G.
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes Mossley)
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Blindell, James
Gill, F. H.
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)


Bendfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Glassey, A. E.
Kedward, R. M. (kent, Ashford)


Bewerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Gossling, A. G.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas


Broad, Francis Alfred
Gould, F.
Kenworthy Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M


Bromfield, William
Granville E.
Kintey, J.


Bromley, J.
Gray, Milner
Kirkwood, D.


Brooke, W.
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Celne)
Knight, Holford


Brothers, M.
Grentell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Srimth, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Lang, Gordon


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Buchanan. G.
Groves, Thomas E.
Lathan, G.


Burgess, F. G.
Grundy, Thomas W.
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Law, A. (Rossefidale)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyf Tydvll)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybrige)


Cameron, A. G.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Lawson, John James


Caper Thomas
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Leach, W.


Charleton, H. C.
Hardie, George D.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)


Chater, Daniel
Hartshdrn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Lee, Jannle (Lanark, Northern)


Cluse, W. S.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Lees, J.


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Haycock, A. W.
Lewis, T. (Southemton)


Compten, Joseph
Hayday, Arthur
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Cove, William G.
Hayes, John Henry
Logan, David Gilbert


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Longbottom, A. W.


Dagger, George
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Longden, F.


Dallas, George

Lunn, William


Da'ton, Hugh

Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)




MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Snell, Harry


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Perry, S. F.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


McElwee, A.
Peters. Dr. Sidney John
Sorensen, R.


McEntee, V. L.
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Stamford, Thomas W.


McKinlay, A.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Stephen, Campbell


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Potts, John S.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govaa)
Price, M. P.
Sullivan, J.


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Pybus, Percy John
Sutton, J. E.


Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James [...].
Quibell, D. J. K.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


McShane, John James
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk. S.W.)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Raynes, W. R.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Richards, R.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Piaistow)


Mansfield, W.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Thurtle, Ernest


Marcus, M.
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Tinker, John Joseph


Markham, S. F.
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Toole, Joseph


Marley, J.
Ritson, J.
Tout, W. J.


Marshall, Fred
Someril, H. G.
Townend, A. E.


Mathers, George
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Maxton, James
Rothschild, J. de
Vaughan, David


Melville, Sir James
Rowson, Guy
Viant, S. P.


Messer, Fred
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Walkden, A. G.


Middleton, G.
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Walker, J.


Millar, J. D.
Sanders, W. S.
Wallace, H. W.


Mills, J. E.
Sandham, E.
Watkins, F. C.


Milner, Major J.
Sawyer, G. F.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Montague, Frederick
Scott, James
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Scrymgeour, E.
Wollock, Wilfred


Morley, Ralph
Scurr, John
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Sexton, Sir James
West, F. R.


Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.
Westwood, Joseph


Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
White, H. G.


Morrison, Robert c. (Tottenham, N.)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Lady wood)


Mort, D. L.
Sherwood, G. H.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Shield, George William
Williams David (Swansea, East)


Muff, G.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
Williams Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Muggeridge, H. T.
Shillaker, J. F.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Murnin, Hugh
Shinwell, E.
Wilson C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Naylor, T. E.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Simmons, C. J.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Noel Baker, P. J.
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhlthe)
Wise, E. F.


Oldfield, J. R.
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Kelghley)
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Palin, John Henry
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)



Palmer, E. T.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—



Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Mr. Charles Edwards and Mr. Paling.

Miss PICTON-TURBERVILL: On a point of Order. Unfortunately, by a mistake I voted in the "Ayes" Lobby, and to put it right I then went into the "Noes" Lobby. Would it be in order to cancel the "Aye" vote?

Mr. SPEAKER: No, the matter must be left as it is. The two votes the hon. Member has given will cancel one another.

CLAUSE 21.—(Financial provisions.)

Major ELLIOT: I beg to move, in page 19, line 6, at the end, to insert the words:
and eleven-eightieths of such sums shall be paid into a separate account for operations in large-scale farming conducted by the Agricultural Land Corporation in Scotland.
When a similar Amendment to this was moved in Committee we were unsuccessful, but I am emboldened to submit it to the House on this occasion by the fact that the Amendment to set up a sub-Committee for Scotland was rejected in Committee but was accepted when it was
moved on the Report stage. As we have got a separate sub-Committee I think there is a case for the separate financial treatment asked for in this Amendment. The proposals brought forward by the Minister of Agriculture and by the Secretary of State for Scotland are admittedly of a nebulous and tentative character. The nebulousness of them is such that we have not been able to get from the Minister what, he means by large-scale farms. He has said it would be un-reasonable to press him on that point now, since large-scale farming is anything that may happen to come into his head. If that is so, let us be sure, at least, that the proposals which are to be brought forward, and for which we shall have to pay, in Scotland, are such as we shall be able to derive benefit from, that something shall be demonstrated which will be of use. Large-scale farming on the light lands of England will not commend itself for imitation in Scotland.
There is, however, a danger, and the Under-Secretary of State has brought it out, that not very much will be done
under this heading in Scotland. If that be so, then we shall be paying for experiments which are of no use to us. Our point has been met by the Government in other parts of the Bill. In Clauses 2 and 3 they adopt the proposal for eleven-eightieths. Hon. Members will see that on page 19 of the Bill-paragraph (a) says that the sum to be dealt with by the Agricultural Land Corporation is not to exceed £1,000,000. Paragraph (b) says that the sums required by the Minister for the purchase of land under Clauses 2 and 3 of the Bill shall not exceed £5,000,000, and goes on to say that the £5,000,000 shall be divided in the ratio of giving Scotland £700,000, which is the eleven-eightieths basis. There is no such provision, however, in the case of large-scale farming. We say this is anomalous. No case has been made out by the Minister to explain why in one part of the Bill the money is to be devoted to Scotland in the ratio of eleven-eightieths and in the other part of the Bill not.
If anything, we ought to be more anxious to make sure that we have eleven-eightieths of the £1,000,000, since the proposals there are much more tentative. The only argument brought forward by the Under-Secretary has been that this would run counter to our previous contention that Scotland should be left out of the proposals for large-scale farming. It does not in any way run counter to it. Our proposal has always been to leave Scotland out of that provision, but to give Scotland eleven-eightieths of the sum and let the money go to the Department of Agriculture for Scotland, which is an existing body and can act in these matters. There is nothing contradictory in having voted in favour of Scotland being excluded from the operations of a corporation for large-scale farming for the United Kingdom and in moving that now that we have a sub-Committee for Scotland that sub-Committee should have control of eleven-eightieths of the funds which the corporation will handle.

Mr. R. W. SMITH: I beg to second the Amendment.
I hope the Government will give it favourable consideration. The whole procedure in regard to large-scale farming in Scotland has been progressive. When the Bill was first brought in it
was clear from the speeches made by those on the Government Front Bench representing Scotland that they did not intend to apply large-scale farming to Scotland. They thought that that omission would pass unnoticed, bit they made a mistake, because there are a certain number of Scotsmen on the Opposition side of the House, and even a certain number among the Liberal party, who always try to get the best they can for Scotland, and I feel sure that we shall have their support in this matter. First of all the Government were not going to do anything, and then we secured the appointment of a sub-committee; and I say that we are only following out the natural sequence of events in providing that sub-committee with funds with which to carry on its work. If the committee is not to have funds what will be the use of it? It will be in the hands entirely of the English director, and might as well not exist. The committee that the main corporation sets up may be entirely corn-posed of Englishmen, who know nothing at all about Scotland. It is a well-known fact that those who hold the purse strings are able to call the tune, and we are asking for nothing more than is reasonable for Scotland in asking for the eleven-eightieths to be set apart in a separate fund for large-scale farming in Scotland.

Mr. MACPHERSON: I rise to reinforce the arguments put forward by my two hon. Friends who have preceded me. What they want is only title corollary of what they have already got. When it was argued the other day that Scotland was entitled to its own sub-committee the Government wisely acceded to the request, and now that the sub-committee is to be set up it follows that it must have something to do, and, accordingly, must have the funds with which to do it. When any sum is given to England in the ordinary course eleven-eightieths of the amount is given to Scotland, under the old Goschen rule, and all we ask of the Government is that they should continue the practice of the past, and, having established a committee, give it the appropriate apportionment of the Imperial funds. It is perfectly true that at no stage have we ardently desired large-scale farming in Scotland. We have had experimental farming there
for some time, and the same necessity for large-scale farming does not obtain there as it does south of the border; but we do desire that this sub-committee should have funds, so that they may consider where advances can be made in our agricultural methods, whether in sheep-farming on a large scale or cattle-raising on a large scale, for there are many experiments yet to be tried. Accordingly, we as Scottish Members strongly press this Amendment, and ask the Government to reconsider the whole position.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. Johnston): As the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Major Elliot) very correctly said, this point was discussed upstairs in Committee and was negatived there without a Division.

Major ELLIOT: I agree that that was so, but we had come to an arrangement with the Government, and in fulfilment of that arrangement we were doing our utmost to facilitate business.

5.0 p.m.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I do not say that hon. Members ran away from this Amendment, but there were, doubtless, very cogent and reasonable considerations which influenced them in choosing other and more important issues upon which to divide the Committee upstairs. When there was only a limited time at their disposal they chose matters of greater moment and importance and decided that this was not one of them. The hon. and gallant Gentleman is perfectly well aware that this is one part of the Bill which the Government, the House of Commons, and the Committee upstairs decided that it would be inappropriate, and indeed difficult, to run in separate nationalist compartments. We separated our small-holdings and allotments work, we separated our demonstration farms, and we separated reconditioning, but it was found to be a matter of great difficulty to set up two large-scale farming corporations and to allocate £1,000,000 in the proportions in which money is usually divided between Scotland and England. It was considered to be much more desirable that, if there was to be a large-scale experiment in mechanised farming,
the United Kingdom Corporation should be set up with powers to borrow as laid down in the Bill, to deal with matters really on a large scale and not in any parochial sense whatsoever. If the experiment were a success—poultry farming, or sheep farming or cereal farming or whatever it might be—obviously all the agriculturists in the country would get the benefit of it.
If, for example, the corporation should decide that more of the money could be usefully spent in Scotland, we do not want the corporation to be debarred from doing so; but, if this Amendment were carried, the corporation could only spend up to eleven-eightieths of this money in Scotland. It is unreasonable that the corporation, which is admittedly an experiment, should have its hands tied and be cribbed, cabined and confined in its initial stage. If subsequently it should be found that the operations of this corporation could be and should be extended both in Scotland and England, then it might be a right and proper thing to say that Scotland should get an appropriate share of the money allocated; but in the initial stages of this great experiment, surely it is highly desirable that the corporation should not be unnecessarily cramped in its efforts to make the experiment a success. If the work is to be done with any chance of success, I submit that the directors of the corporation should be left as free as possible to chose the subjects and areas on which they are most likely to achieve success. It was for those reasons that the Government decided that it was preferable in the initial stages that the corporation should have a United Kingdom basis.

Sir PATRICK FORD: I am very glad that the hon. Gentleman the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland recognises that the United Kingdom basis for legislation is sometimes desirable in reference to Scotland. He and I differ in that we think different things should be dealt with separately. This is a thing that I do not think should be dealt with on a United Kingdom basis at all, because, as I understand it, it relates to experiments in large-scale farming. I speak as one who is more or less familiar with farming on a large scale, and fairly successful farming in the Lothians of Scotland. In that dis-
trict farming is on quite a big enough scale, but, on the other hand, there are other districts, the crofting districts for example, for which large-scale farming would not be suited at all, and it would be a mistake to experiment where the conditions made it impossible, or to experiment with districts where farming is already going on on a large scale and has worked successfully for generations, and to break up that system. We would prefer to have eleven-eightieths of the money for experimenting in other ways for the benefit of agriculture in Scotland, and for those reasons I emphatically oppose the United Kingdom basis for this system of experiment in Scotland.

Mr. SKELTON: The main point which was made by the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland was that in the early stages of this experiment we should not know how much we should have to spend in Scotland. I do not agree with that view. I should have thought that from the outset, instead of there being any quarrel as to what proportion should be allocated to England and Scotland, it should know at the outset what they are to have. I cannot imagine anything less likely to make for good administration than that every year, when the question of expenditure came up, the main energy of the corporation and their sub-committee should be spent in a dog-fight as to who was to get the bone or what proportion of the bone. It seems to me that if there is to be a well-thought-out policy of experiment, you must know the financial basis on which the policy is going to proceed. I do not at all appreciate the point that if later the experiment is found to be a success you could change the proportion. The point would be that if the experiment were a success you would increase the total amount, but that would not be a change of proportion. If we are to adopt the view, which I do with some hesitation, that Scotland would benefit, and that there is room in Scotland for this large-scale experiment, it seems to me to be vital that the people there should have a definite and not an indefinite sum at their disposal.
When I and other hon. Members pointed out that there might be difficulties in making full use of large-scale experiments in Scotland, I was assured by the Secretary of State for Scotland
—and I am not sure that I was not also told by the Under-Secretary also—that the whole of the area between the Pentlands and Ayrshire was crying out for money to be expended in this way. We are told in one breath that it is doubtful whether money would be needed in Scotland at all, and now we are given an argument which even the most ingenuous Member from North of the Tweed cannot be expected to swallow, that, if we are to get eleven-eightieths, we shall not get any more. There is a phrase which is very often used by the hon. Member for Silvertown (Mr. J. Jones), "A little bit of sugar for the bird." This seems to me to be an admirable example of the use of that kind of diet.

Mr. JOHNSTON: There are subjects on which we get more than eleven-eightieths now.

Mr. SKELTON: I am very glad to hear it, but these are only acquired by very deep Parliamentary subterfuges, and I am very unwilling to introduce into this new matter so tortuous a method. I do not want to make a debating point, but I press strongly that it should be realised in Scotland and here that, if there is any substance in the Government view that experiments in large-scale farming should be made, and that these are urgently necessary in Scotland, they should be made upon an adequate basis, and that the finance should be settled so that the sub-committee could go on with its work of seeing how best to expend a fixed and known financial amount, and not be merely a catspaw of the English corporation.

Lieut.-Colonel ACLAND-TROYTE: It is not often that I am in favour of any proposals made by the Government—the Bill to my mind is a very bad Bill—but on this particular point I do agree with the Government. I very much object to what I regard as the narrow nationalism of Scotland, always trying to grab, grab, grab. I fail to see why, if Scotland is to get eleven-eightieths of this expenditure, I should not get another eleven-eightieths for Devonshire. If the money is to be wasted, why should it be wasted in Scotland? I protest against the constant attempts of Scottish Members to try to "pinch" money from us, and I hope the Government will stand firm.

Sir HARRY HOPE: I want to say that in Scotland there is absolutely no desire for money to be spent upon large-scale national farming. My hon. and gallant Friend the Member for Tiverton (Lieut.-Colonel Acland-Troyte) has said that we in Scotland want to get as much money here as we can possibly obtain. Whether we have done that or not in the past I do not know, but certainly on this occasion we have no desire to grab money for this purpose. Large-scale national farming is anathema to the whole of the agricultural community of the country, and therefore we have no desire to get

any more than what is the ordinary Scottish share. If this money could be spent on research work, we would be quite ready to take all we could get. But to spend it on the futile, absurd, and unpractical proposal of carrying on governmental farms is an absolute waste of public money at a time when there is no public money to spare, and we Scots do not desire to take any hand in that work.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House divided; Ayes, 202; Noes, 241.

Division No. 139.]
AYES.
[5.16 p.m.


Albery, Irving James
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Margesson, Captain H. D.


Aske, Sir Robert
Eden, Captain Anthony
Marjoribanks, Edward


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Meller, R. J.


Atholl, Duchess of
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd


Atkinson, C.
Elmley, Viscount
Mitchell. Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
England, Colonel A.
Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-s.-M.)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Everard, W. Lindsay
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)


Balniel, Lord
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Beaumont. M. W.
Ferguson, Sir John
Morris, Rhys Hopkins


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Fermoy, Lord
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)


Betterton, Sir Henry B
Fielden, E. B.
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Fison, F. G. Clavering
Muirhead, A. J.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Foot, Isaac
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Bird, Ernest Roy
Ford, Sir P. J.
Nicholson, Col.Rt. Hn. W.G.(Ptrsf'ld)


Bllndell, James
Galbraith. J. F. W.
Nleid, Rt. Hon. Sir Herbert


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Gault, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
O'Neill, Sir H.


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Glassey, A. E.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Boyce, Leslie
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Peake, Captain Osbert


Bracken, B.
Gower, Sir Robert
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Grace, John
Peters, Dr. Sidney John


Brass, Captain Sir William
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Briscoe, Richard George
Granville, E.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Blown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Purbrick, R.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Gray, Milner
Ramsay. T. B. Wilson


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Griffith. F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Ramsbotham, H.


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Gritten, W. G. Howard
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Buchan, Jonn
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Reid, David D. (County Down)


Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Rentoul, Sir Gervais S.


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James


Butler, R. A.
Hamilton, Sir George (llford)
Robert's. Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hammersley, S. S.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Campbell, E. T.
Hanbury, C.
Ross, Major Ronald D.


Carver, Major W. H.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Haslam, Henry C.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Cayzer, Maj, Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth, s)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Cazalet, Captain Victor A
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Savery, S. S.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Scott, James


Chapman, Sir S.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Christie, J. A.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Shepperson. Sir Ernest Whittome


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Hurd, Percy A.
Skelton, A. N.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Calman, N. C. D.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Smith. R.W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Colvllie, Major D. J.
Iveagh, Countess of
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Cranborne, Viscount
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Smithers, Waldron


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Somerset, Thomas


Crookshank, Cpt.H.(Lindsey,Galnsbro)
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Somervllie, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Cunllffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (W. Molton)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Dalkeith, Earl of
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Dalrympie-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrev
Long, Major Hon. Eric
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Lymington, Viscount
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur


Dawson, Sir Philip
Macdonald. Capt. P. D. (I. of W)
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Taylor, Vice-Admiral E. A.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Thomson, Sir F.
Warrender, sir Victor
Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavist'k)


Tinne, J. A.
Wayland, Sir William A.
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Wells, Sydney R.



Todd, Capt. A. J.
White, H. G.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Train, J.
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)
Sir George Penny and Captain


Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George
Euan Wallace.


Turton, Robert Hugh
Womersley, W. J.



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Morley, Ralph


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Hardie, George D.
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)


Aitchlson, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Mort, D. L.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Haycock, A. W.
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)


Alpass, J. H.
Hayday, Arthur
Muff, G.


Angell, Sir Norman
Hayes, John Henry
Muggeridge, H. T.


Arnott, John
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Murnin, Hugh


Attlee, Clement Richard
Henderson, Arthur, junr, (Cardiff, S.)
Naylor, T. E.


Ayles, Walter
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Herriotts, J.
Noel Baker, P. J.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)


Barnes, Alfred John
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Oldfield, J. R.


Barr, James
Hoffman, P. C.
Palln, John Henry


Batey, Joseph
Hollins, A.
Paling, Wllfrid


Bellamy, Albert
Hopkin, Daniel
Palmer, E. T.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Horrabin, J. F.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)


Benson, G.
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Perry, S. F.


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Isaacs, George
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Jenkins, Sir William
Picton-Turbervill, Edith


Broad, Francis Alfred
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Pole, Major D. G.


Bromfield, William
Johnston, Thomas
Potts, John S.


Bromley, J.
Jones, Rt. Hon. Leif (Camborne)
Price, M. P.


Brooke, W.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Pybus, Percy John


Brothers, M.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Qulbell, D. J. K.


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Raynes, W. R.


Buchanan, G.
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Richards, R.


Burgess, F. G.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)


Cameron, A. G.
Kinley, J.
Rlley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Cape, Thomas
Kirkwood, D.
Ritson, J.


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Knight, Holford
Romeril, H. G.


Charleton. H. C.
Lang, Gordon
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Chater, Daniel
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Rowson, Guy


Cluse, W. S.
Lathan, G
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Sanders, W. S.


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Law, A. (Rossendale)
Sawyer, G. F.


Compton, Joseph
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Scrymgeour, E.


Cove. William G.
Lawson, John James
Scurr, John


Crisps, Sir Stafford
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Sexton, Sir James


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Leach, W.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Daggar, George
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Dallas, George
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Sherwood, G. H.


Dalton, Hugh
Lees, J.
Shield, George William


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Day, Harry
Lloyd, C. Eill
Shillaker, J. F.


Dukes, C.
Logan, David Gilbert
Shinwell, E.


Duncan, Charles
Longbottom, A. W.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Ede, James Chuter
Longden, F.
Simmons, C. J.


Edmunds, J. E.
Lunn, William
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Smith, H. B. Lees- (Keighley)


Egan, W. H.
McElwee, A.
Smith, Ronnie (Penistone)


Forgan, Dr. Robert
McEntee, V. L.
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Freeman, Peter
McKinlay, A.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
MacLaren, Andrew
Snell, Harry


George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Gibbins, Joseph
McShane, John James
Sorensen, R.


Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Stamford, Thomas W.


Gill, T. H.
Mansfield, W.
Stephen, Campbell


Gossling. A. G.
Marcus, M.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Gould, F.
Markham, S. F.
Sullivan, J.


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Marley, J.
Sutton, J. E.


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).
Marshall, Fred
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mathers, George
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Maxton, James
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Groves, Thomas E.
Melville, Sir James
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plalstow)


Grundy, Thomas W.
Messer, Fred
Thurtle, Ernest


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Middleton, G.
Tinker, John Joseph


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvll)
Mills, J. E.
Toole, Joseph


Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Montague, Frederick
Tout, W. J.




Townend, A. E.
Wedgwood, Rt. Hon. Joslah
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Wellock, Wilfred
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Vaughan, David
Welsh, James (Paisley)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester, Louohb'gh)


Viant, S. P.
West, F. R.
Wise, E. F.


Walkden, A. G.
Westwood, Joseph
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Walker, J.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)



Wallace, H. W.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Watkins, F. C.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)
Mr. T. Henderson and Mr. Ben Smith.


Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)



Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I beg to move, in page 19, line 9, to leave out the word "sections," and to insert instead thereof the word "section."
The object of this Amendment, and of the consequential Amendments which follow, is to prevent the finance of the demonstration farms from being mixed up in one sum of £5,000,000 with the finance of the reclamation and reconditioning of land. It is a very odd thing in this Bill that, whereas the large-scale farms have a specific sum allotted to them, the smallholdings are provided for by their special financial section—though the sum is indefinite—and, similarly, there is a separate section for the allotments, nevertheless the general sum of £5,000,000 is allotted to the joint purposes of financing both the demonstration farms and the reclamation of land. We on this side of the House consider that it is an extremely bad Treasury practice, and an extremely bad and growing Parliamentary practice, not to provide a definite sum for each principal object of a Bill in the Bill itself, and we consider that each principal object of the Bill should have a separate financial section to itself. By these Amendments we enter a, protest against this attempt of the Treasury on this occasion to depart from the general rule which hitherto has guided them, and to lump these two quite dissimilar portions of the Bill under one financial sub-section.
Really, the financing of the demonstration farms—the scientific experiments that are to be conducted in addition to the large-scale farming, for the purpose of providing object-lessons and training centres for the farmers of the country—has absolutely nothing whatever to do with the reclamation and reconditioning of derelict or neglected land. We consider that the Government, by lumping these two portions of the Bill together under this one Sub-section, are setting a dangerous and a bad precedent. We want to see the proper system of drafting and of financing in regard to these matters once again reaffirmed by Parlia-
ment. In proposing that the financial provision which is to be made for demonstration farms and for the reclamation and reconditioning of land respectively should be divided into two defined sums of money, we wish to take this, which will be our only opportunity, of protesting against the expenditure of £5,000,000 with no economic safeguards, either on more demonstration farms or on the reconditioning of derelict land. We are very doubtful whether under either heading it will be possible to get value for such a national expenditure, and we consider that the present time is singularly inopportune for such expenditure, when the money could be used in the interests of agriculture to much better purpose by assisting those crops, not on the worst land but on the better land, which, owing partly to the action, and still more to the inaction, of the present Government, are not economic.

Dr. ADDISON: The effect of the right hon. Gentleman's series of Amendments is not only what he has described, but a little more. It is to limit the expenditure on demonstration farms under Clause 2 to £500,000, and the remaining £100,000 is all that would then be left for the purposes of Clause 3, which includes land reclamation, drainage, etc., and land which may be acquired as being grossly neglected.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: We need not quarrel about that. The principle is the important thing. If the right hon. Gentleman says he wants £500,000 for reconditioning, I think that was rather the intention—to divide it and have £500,000 for each purpose.

Dr. ADDISON: That restores something like a sense of proportion, but the effect of the series of Amendments is that £500,000 would be available for Clause 2 and £100,000 for Clause 3. If the right hon. Gentleman, on the whole, thinks that £500,000 is a reasonable figure for demonstration farms, I do not think I. should have much occasion to differ.
But we have deliberately put the finance of these two Clauses together, because it may easily happen, and I should think it certainly will happen, that in the course of development and administration they will to some extent overlap, and it is unnecessary to draw an artificial line between them. The right hon. Gentleman says the time is inopportune to propose spending money on reconditioning or reclamation, or dealing with land that is neglected. There I disagree with him entirely. I think this time of all others is when we should attend to improving our national heritage. It will take a series of years to use the money that is provided under the Bill, but it will improve the land and provide a considerable amount of very valuable employment. Anyhow, to reduce Clause 3 to £100,000—

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I will not move that Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: We will say no more about that, but, for the reasons I have given, it would be unwise artificially to divide the sum. It may be that the land that is reclaimed or restored may be taken over for demonstration farms. There is no necessity to separate them, and, in any case, an arbitrary limit is entirely contrary to the main purpose of the scheme.

Colonel ASHLEY: Two points of considerable interest have emerged from the right hon. Gentleman's speech. In the first place, he admits that £500,000 is about as much as he thinks one could usefully spend on demonstration farms. That is, after all, a very great step in advance, because, at any rate, we know now, as taxpayers, the worst that is going to happen to the national finances under these unnecessary demonstration farms. We have to have them, I agree, because they are in the Bill, but in one sense, in my opinion, there is no need for them. Private enterprise has given us all the demonstration we want, and this £500,000 will be entirely wasted money. Anyhow, it is a blessing to know that it is not going to be more than £500,000. The right hon. Gentleman simply reiterated the statement that you can usefully put in one Clause both demonstration farms and reconditioning.
He simply made the statement that you could and that it was convenient to do so.
He gave no reason at all why two such dissimilar things should be put into one Clause and why £5,000,000 should be lumped together for these two purposes. Demonstration may be good or bad, but it is an attempt, on the part either of the State or of the individual, by up-to-date methods and by taking considerable areas to show what can be done under modern conditions and with modern machinery, with large capital and generally by co-operative methods. That is one thing. But reconditioning is absolutely different. It means that the State considers that certain lands are not in a good state. They do not proceed to demonstrate how well they can, do it in the sense of making experiments. They proceed to put it back into a state in which it can be used in agriculture. I cannot see that there is any reason at all why these two objects should be put in the same Clause, and, frankly, I do not understand the reason for not accepting my right hon. Friend's idea.
We now know that the right hon. Gentleman does not wish to spend more than £500,000 on demonstration farms. He should have the £500,000 earmarked for demonstration farms and another sum for reconditioning. By a process of elimination we have now arrived at Mae fact that the Minister has in his mind that over a series of years the Treasury will be allowed to spend £4,500,000 on reconditioning land. On the face of it, it sounds quite reasonable. If the agriculturist can get a decent return for the stuff he grows, it is a most excellent proposal, because we do not want land to lie derelict which can be usefully cultivated, to grow food for the people and to increase the national wealth. But it seems to me that the money must be largely wasted. I am reinforced in that idea, because file right hon. Gentleman has refused an Amendment that no money shall be spent on reconditioning land unless it can be demonstrated that there will be a return for the money put into it. Here we have £1,500,000 to be spent in three or four years with no certainty that it will be well spent, because he says, "I will recondition land whether it is a good business proposition or not."

Dr. ADDISON indicated dissent.

Colonel ASHLEY: That is what it comes to. He is going to recondition land, and he refuses to say he visualises that the land will pay when it is reconditioned. He has refused an Amendment which says, "You shall only recondition if a dividend is to be paid on it." It seems to me a very sound business proposition that you should not recondition land unless you are going to get something out of it. Not only are we going to fritter away this £4,500,000, but, when the money is spent, the land need not, and probably will not, bring any addition to the wealth of the country, and the man who farms it will have no guarantee that what he grows will be sold at a decent price. I think my right hon. Friend's Amendment is a very reasonable one on two grounds. One, that the two dissimilar objects ought to be separated, and, secondly, that the £4,500,000 will be wasted in reconditioning land which will not pay when it is reconditioned.

Mr. HARDIE: Some of us have been sitting very quietly on these benches in order to help the Government and to prevent the wasting of time. I have never known so much cant and humbug talked on an Amendment. One can recall the sugar-beet business and the £20,000,000 that was going to one or two firms alone. There was no call then for great accuracy in the accounts. It was going into the pockets of the wealthy. Whenever it is anything where the common people are likely to get a little benefit, then you get right hon. Gentlemen opposite asking for accounts. "What did you do with that l½d.?" The £20,000,000 was not given with the idea of making things better for the masses. It provided a subsidy which was altogether outside the needs of the industry, as is proved by the fact that they could have given the sugar away free and still made a profit.
I want the House to realise that we are seeking to bring land which is lying useless into cultivation, or into proper use. Surely no money could be better spent at any time or anywhere than bringing what is of permanent value into function, because land functioning is the one permanent value that we have. Since 1918 we have spent something like £300,000,000 on unemployment benefit with nothing to show for it. Here is a proposal that means that for what we
are going to spend we are going to have at least something. But, quite apart from the value of what may be left, there is that great understanding of trying to do something for the nation in the difficulties under which, like other nations, it is suffering at the moment. As far as the beet-sugar industry and its subsidy are concerned, it looks as if nothing is to be left but the debris.

Mr. DEPUTY - SPEAKER (Mr. Dunnico): I do not think the question of the beet-sugar subsidy arises here. This Amendment deals with the dividing of the accounts into two sections.

Mr. HARDIE: The right hon. Gentleman is asking for more meticulous accounts. I am using the illustration given by the right hon. and gallant Gentleman on the other side. If they think it is right that this should happen here, then why did they not fight for a similar provision in regard to the beet-sugar subsidy They did not do so, because the money was going to their friends. Now that we are trying to provide something from which the common people are going to get some benefit, there is a demand for scientific accountancy. I agree with the application of scientific principles, but here hon. Members opposite wish to do it in regard to one side and not in regard to the other. If the thing is good, it should be applied all round. Intelligent people always do that. The effort which is being made now is an earnest effort to try to get back that which is permanent in relation to helping unemployment. It is cheap almost at any price when it comes to providing a permanent opportunity for men and women to obtain benefit from the cultivation of the land. We know that hon. and right hon. Gentleman on the other side do not like it. They wish to have conditions as far as the land is concerned, that will enable them to dictate the serf conditions always associated with them.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: Where?

Mr. HARDIE: I might be out of order if I traversed in that direction and gave details. Those who ask the question have only to look at the condition of the modern agricultural labourer. This is a paltry sum compared with the amount of
the beet-sugar subsidy and it will be of immense value. I hope that the Minister will meet the Opposition by remaining rigid, and that he will not give way one jot or tittle. In regard to every question which becomes as practical as the present question, he is sure to have with him a majority of the intelligent men in the House.

Lieut.-Colonel RUGGLES-BRISE: The House has been treated to a little quarrel between the back benchers opposite and my right hon. and gallant Friend. I should like to ask the House to consider the following point. The hon. Member for Springburn (Mr. Hardie) evidently thinks that the whole of this Bill forms part of the policy of the Government for dealing with unemployment. On the other hand, I understood, and I think the House generally understood, that the Agricultural Land (Utilisation) Bill was part of the vaunted policy of the Government to deal with agriculture and to show the farmers of the country how to make farming pay. We on this side of the House are entitled to know from the right hon. Gentleman opposite what is the underlying purpose of this Bill. What is the primary object? Is the right hon. Gentleman the Minister of Agriculture trying to do what the learned Attorney-General failed to do the other day, namely, to kill two birds with one stone?

Mr. HARDIE: The hon. and gallant Gentleman has made a statement with regard to what I have said. May I call his attention to Clause 14, the marginal note of which says:
Power of Minister to provide allotments not exceeding one acre for unemployed persons.
That is the part with which I was dealing.

Lieut.-Colonel RUGGLES-BRISE: We are not at the moment dealing with the Clause which makes provision for allotments for the unemployed. To return to the rather wider issue, before we go any further it is only right that the House, and, through the House, the country should be told quite clearly what is the fundamental and underlying purpose of this part of the Bill. Is it part of the policy of the Government for dealing with unemployment, or is it part of their policy to make farming pay?
We ought to be told quite definitely. The House will have learnt with some relief, I feel sure, that the right hon. Gentleman has in mind a figure of approximately £500,000 as the outside limit which he would wish to devote to demonstration farms. I, personally, am extremely relieved that the right hon. Gentleman has not a larger figure than that in his mind, but I should feel a great deal safer, and I am sure that we on this side of the House would enjoy a sense of relief, if we could have that limit actually inserted in the Bill. It the right hon. Gentleman is so clear in his mind as to the sum which he intends to devote for demonstration farms, why does he object so strongly to putting the figure into the Bill? Surely, there can be no objection to such a course.
With regard to the £4,500,000 which, he tells us, he intends to devote to the reclaiming and reconditioning of land, I would ask him what is the amount of acreage in this country—4 believe the figure is in his possession—at the present time which has ever been farmed within recent years and which has now fallen into decay and is not being farmed at all? To the best of my information, the figure is an extraordinarily small one. Out of some 30,000,000 acres of land in this country devoted to farming, I believe that I am right in saying that a mere trifle—some 75,000 acres only—has fallen out of cultivation. The right hon. Gentleman shakes his head. I invite him to give the figure if he will be so good. but I am informed that the figure is approximately what I have stated. If only a fraction of the land in this country has fallen out of cultivation, I would ask the right hon. Gentleman to tell the House how he can possibly justify the proposals in this Clause and devote a sum of not less than £4,500,000 to the reclamation of such a comparatively small amount of land. My right hon. and gallant Friend the Member for the New Forest (Colonel Ashley) has pointed clearly to the House the futility of spending any of this money. Even if you are successful in your reclamation work, and you bring back a few thousand acres of wheat land into condition so that they may be farmed, what, after all, have you achieved, if the agricultural produce grown on such land cannot find a market at a price which makes it
worth growing? Yet at the present time, when we have the country labouring under great financial stress, the Government ask the House to vote a sum of not less than £4,500,000 for the reclamation of this land.
It is a monstrous action at this time to incur any expenditure whatever unless it is productive expenditure. We have a Government in power who appear to think that the purse of the taxpayer is completely inexhaustible, and I know that when the next General Election comes we shall have members of the Socialist party standing on platforms up and down the country saying, "Look what we have spent for you! We have spent £1,000,000 on this and we have spent £4,500,000 on that, and are you not very grateful to us for what we have done?" I believe that the farmers of the country will say, "Thank you for nothing. There are many other ways in which you might have spent the money very much more profitably if you really intended to carry out your last election promise to make farming pay."

Mr. TOWNEND: It is rather amusing for some of us to have to listen to a speech such as that which has been delivered by the hon. and gallant Member for Maldon (Lieut.-Colonel Ruggles-Brise) following the speech of the right hon. and gallant Member for the New Forest (Colonel Ashley), both of whom informed us that the proposals of the Minister in allowing this money to be used for the purposes indicated, to which, obviously, neither of them can lend their support, are amazing and monstrous. I was reminded, while listening to the late Minister for Transport, of the way in which he provided a wonderful example for the Minister of Agriculture to follow when he carried through the House and through Committee upstairs the Electricity Bill, 1926.

Colonel ASHLEY: The present Minister of Agriculture says frankly, "I do not mind whether I lose any money or not," and he refuses to accept any Amendment in order to find out, whereas in my Electricity Bill it was proposed to save £40,000,000 in 10 years' time.

Mr. TOWNEND: It will be well within the recollection of the late Minister of
Transport, that when we were discussing the Electricity Bill upstairs, it was admitted by him and other hon. Members on his side of the House, that in regard to the extension of electricity to rural districts, to the far outposts of the country, and the laying down of the grid, the industrial areas would have to make up the loss involved in carrying the electricity to the far distant parts. When the right hon. and gallant Gentleman points out to us that it is a monstrous undertaking to advance the money for the development of agriculture, I would remind him of the millions allocated under the Electricity Act of 1926. There was no question at that time as to the accuracy of accounts. The question of compensation to people removed from their professional positions, the question of payment for transformation of machinery in order to bring about the standard currency were lumped together in the provision of money under that Measure. The right hon. and gallant Gentleman professes to be willing to agree to spending money on co-operative methods and is not prepared to support the conditioning parts of this Bill. I would remind him that the Electricity Act, in addition to introducing more scientific methods, also introduced conditioning in regard to the electricity supply of the country. I suggest to Members on the other side, who are so desirous of being accurate in the allocation of the £4,500,000, that they should endeavour to cast their minds back three or four years when they were shepherding a Measure of a similar character, but one of far greater importance from the financial point of view, through this House and supporting the Minister in regard to principles which they themselves had already laid down.

6.0 p.m.

Major MUIRHEAD: An hon. Member opposite raised a protest against the waste of time. I protest against the waste of money, and I suggest to him that we join hands and form an anti-waste society. We are on common ground. There is just as much connection between time and money as there is between demonstration farms and the re-clamation of land. If you can put the two last mentioned subjects into one section, surely we can put time and money into
one society. I hope the hon. Member will accept my invitation to join me. The trouble about the reclamation of land seems to be that the Minister of Agriculture is thinking in terms of a by-gone age. That is rather characteristic of the party opposite. They get certain well-worn old tags into their head and keep on grinding them out time after time, year after year, generation after generation, regardless of the fact that the conditions which originally started them have long since passed away. Reclamation of land, tied cottages, security for the farmer are things that had their vogue years and years ago, but the party opposite keep on grinding them out, although the conditions which originally started them have entirely changed. That is the position in regard to the reclamation of land.
The Minister of Agriculture is thinking in terms of an age when the requirements of the population pressed very hardly upon the means of production. The people were always wanting more food, and one of the problems was the cultivation of land to provide that food. The needs of the people were pressing upon the means of production. The situation has now completely altered. The needs of production are now pressing very severely upon the means of marketing economically the stuff that is produced. In days gone by it was no doubt a very estimable thing to reclaim land which had never been cultivated and to bring it into cultivation, because that catered for the needs of the moment. To-day, the question is not that we want more land cultivated, but that we need to arrange a system by which the products of the land can be sold profitably. The elevators in Canada have been bulging with corn. Why were the elevators not drained? Because they could not be drained economically. The economic situation of the world did not allow those elevators to be drained economically.

Dr. ADDISON: On a paint of Order. May I suggest that on this Amendment we ought not to have a wide, sweeping discussion on the whole purposes of the Bill?

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: On that point of Order, may I observe that two speeches were made on the other side which went
extremely wide, and I submit that we are entitled to make an answer?

Mr. DEPUTY-SPEAKER: I called hon. Members to order and pointed out that we were getting exceedingly wide from the subject matter of the Amendment, but when statements are made one has to give some little latitude in reply. I can only appeal to hon. Members not to abuse that latitude, but to keep somewhat within the limits of the Amendment.

Major MUIRHEAD: I very much regret if I have in any way wandered outside the limits of discussion. I do not object to the Minister of Agriculture raising the point of Order, despite the fact that two hon. Members on his own side went rather wide of the subject.

Mr. TOWNEND: May I point out that in your Ruling you did not state that two hon. Members on this side had travelled rather widely?

Major MUIRHEAD: I have no doubt that those two hon. Members tried his patience very much and that he has adopted the common farm of venting his wrath upon a third and Comparatively innocent party. We consider that in regard to demonstration farms we have sufficient already and that the Minister of Agriculture can get all the information that he wants from those that are in existence. But whether that is so or not, a demonstration farm can be conducted perfectly soundly, and it can teach lessons which need to be taught, not merely lessons of production but lessons of economic production. That is not so with regard to the reclamation of land. You may reclaim and drain land but it certainly does not demonstrate anything which is in keeping with the economic tendencies of the day. That is a fundamental reason why these two things should be divided, the demonstration farm can be, ought to be and probably will be used definitely to teach lessons on which we are concentrating our gaze to-day. The reclamation of land will run absolutely counter to all the main economic tendencies of the present moment.

Viscount CRANBORNE: When I was listening to the right hon. Gentleman it seemed to me that he shifted his ground constantly during his opposition to the
Amendment. In the first place, he said, in his nicest possible way, "Please do not separate these two matters, although they really overlap. You may very easily reclaim some land and afterwards you may need to use it as a demonstration farm." Further on, I understood the right hon. Gentleman to say that not more than £500,000 would be required for the demonstration farm. Therefore we were left to the obvious conclusion that there would be £4,500,000 to be spent on reclaiming land. That led to the further question, why was this reclamation of land to take place, and I understood him to say that one of the main purposes was to give employment to the unemployed. He said that it was rather shocking on our part to oppose the reclamation of land, when there was such serious unemployment. That led to the further question, what men were to be

employed. Not obviously, men from the agricultural districts, because there is very little unemployment there. They must be men brought from the towns. It seems to me a very absurd thing that we should bring men from the towns and employ them in the reclamation of land which is at present uneconomic. When we make a proposition to protect the industries and to give men work at their own job hon. Members opposite say that it is the greatest mistake, and that it is uneconomic, but, they now come forward and make a proposition to spend large sums of money on the reclamation of absolutely uneconomic land. It is a very ridiculous proposal, and I hope that the House will not accept it.

Question put, "That the word 'sections' stand part of the Bill."

The House divided: Ayes, 269; Noes, 190.

Division No. 140.]
AYES.
[6.10 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Dalton, Hugh
Hoffman, P. C.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hollins, A.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Day, Harry
Hopkin, Daniel


Aitchison. Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hore-Bellsha, Leslie


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbre')
Dukes, C.
Horrabin, J. F.


Alpass, J. H.
Ede, James Chuter
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)


Angell, Sir Norman
Edmunds, J. E.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph


Arnott, John
Edwards, c. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Isaacs, George


Aske, Sir Robert
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Jenkins, Sir William


Attlee, Clement Richard
Egan, W. H.
John, William (Rhondda, West)


Ayles, Walter
Elmley, Viscount
Johnston, Thomas


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Foot, Isaac
Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Freeman, Peter
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.


Barnes, Alfred John
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)


Barr, James
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)


Batey, Joseph
Gibbins, Joseph
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas


Bellamy, Albert
Gibson, H. M. (Lancs, Mossley)
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.


Bennett, sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Gill, T. H.
Kinley, J.


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Gillett, George M.
Kirkwood, D.


Benson, G.
Glassey, A. E.
Knight, Holford


Blindell, James
Gossling, A. G.
Lang, Gordon


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Gould, F.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Lathan, G.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Granville, E.
Law, Albert (Bolton)


Brockway, A. Fenner
Gray, Milner
Law, A. (Rossendale)


Bromfield, William
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)


Bromley, J.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Lawther, w. (Barnard Castle)


Brooke, W.
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Leach, W.


Brothers, M.
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Groves, Thomas E.
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Grundy, Thomas W.
Lees, J.


Bushanan, G.
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Lewis, T. (Southampton)


Burgess, F. G.
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Lloyd, C. Ellis


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Logan, David Gilbert


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Lengbottom, A. W.


Calne, Derwent Hall
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Longden, F.


Cameron, A. G.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Lunn, William


Cape, Thomas
Hardie, George D.
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
MacDonald, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)


Charleton, H. C.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
McElwee, A.


Chater, Daniel
Haycock, A. W.
McEntee, V. L.


Cluse, W. S.
Hayday, Arthur
MeKinlay, A.


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govas)


Compton, Joseph
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.


Cove, William G.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
McShane, John James


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Herriotts, J.
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)


Daggar, George
Hirst, G. H. (York W.R. Wentworth)
Mansfield, W.


Dallas, George
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Marcus, M.


Markham, S. F.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Merley, J.
Raynes, W. R.
Strachey, E. J. St. Lee


Marshall, Fred
Richards, R.
Sullivan, J.


Mathers, George
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Sutton, J. R.


Matters, L. W.
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Melville, Sir James
Riley, F. F. (Steckton-on-Tees)
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Messer, Fred
Ritson, J.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Mills, J. E.
Romeril, H. G.
Thorne, W. (West Ham, Plaistaw)


Milner, Major J.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Thurtle, Ernest


Montague, Frederick
Rothschild, J. de
Tinker, John Joseph


Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Rowson, Guy
Toole, Joseph


Morley, Ralph
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Tout, W. J.


Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Townend, A. E.


Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Sanders, W. S.
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles


Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)
Sawyer, G. F.
Vaughan, David


Mort, D. L.
Scott, James
Viant, S. P.


Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Scrymgeour, E.
Walkden, A. G.


Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Scurr, John
Walker, J.


Muff, G.
Sexton, Sir James
Wallace, H. W.


Muggeridge, H. T.
Shakespeare, Groffrey H.
Watkins, F. C.


Murnin, Hugh
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Naylor, T. E.
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col D. (Rhondda)


Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Sherwood, G. H.
Wellock, Wilfred


Noel Baker, P. J.
Shield, George William
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Shiels, Dr. Drummond
West, F. R.


Oldfield, J. R.
Shillaker, J. F.
Westwood, Joseph


Oliver, p. M. (Man., Blackley)
Shinwell, E.
White, H. G.


Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)
Whileley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Palin, John Henry.
Simmons, C. J.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Paling, Wilfrid
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Palmer, E. T.
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Perry, S. F.
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Pole, Major D. G.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Potts, John S.
Snell, Harry
Wise, E. F.


Price, M. P.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Pybus, Percy John
Sorensen, R.
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Qulbell, D. F. K.
Stamford, Thomas W.



Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Stephen, Campbell
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—




Mr. Parkinson and Mr. Hayes.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.
Chapman, Sir S.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)


Albery, Irving James
Christie, J. A.
Glyn, Major R. G. C.


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Gower, Sir Robert


Amory, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Grattan-Doyle, sir N.


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J.(Kent, Dover)
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John


Atholl, Duchess of
Caiman, N. C. D.
Gritten, W. G. Howard


Atkinson, C.
Colvifle, Major D. J.
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Baillie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Gunstton, Captain D. W.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.


Balfour, Captain H. H, (I. of Thanet)
Cranborne, Viscount
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Balniel, Lord
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Hammersley, S. S.


Beaumont, M. W.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Hanbury, C.


Bollairs, Commander Carlyon
Crookshank, Cpt.H.(Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Betterton, Sir Henry B.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Culverwall, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Haslam, Henry C.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Cunliffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Dalkeith, Earl of
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Dairymple-White. Lt.Col. Sir Godfrey
Hope, Sir Harry (Forlar)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F,(Somerset, Yeovil)
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vanslttart
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hurd, Percy A.


Boyce, Leslie
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.


Bracken, B.
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Hutchison, Maj. Gen. Sir R.


Brass, Captain Sir William
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)


Briscoe, Richard George
Eden, Captain Anthony
Kindersley, Major G. M.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Haxham)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Knox, Sir Alfred


Brown, Brig. Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Lamb, Sir J. O.


Buchan, John
England, Colonel A.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s-M.)
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)


Butler, R. A.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Leighton, Major B. E. P.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)


Campbell, E. T.
Ferguson, Sir John
Lymington, Viscount


Carver, Major W. H.
Fermoy, Lord
McConnell, Sir Joseph


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Fielden, E. B.
Macquisten, F. A.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Fison, F. G. Clavering
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Ford, Sir P. J.
Margesson, Captain H. D.


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtemth,S.)
Fremantle, Lient.-Colonel Francis E.
Marjoribanks, Edward


Cazalet, Captain Victor A.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Meller, R. J.


Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.Sir J.A.(Birm.,W.)
Gauit, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd




Millar, J. D.
Ross, Major Ronald D.
Tinne, J. A.


Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Titchfield, Major the Marguess of


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Todd, Capt. A. J.


Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Train, J.


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. B. (Ayr)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.
Turton, Robert Hugh


Muirhead, A. J.
Savery, S. S.
Ward, Lieut.-Col. sir A. Lambert


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn.W. G.(Ptrsf'ld)
Simms, Major-General J.
Warrender, Sir Victor


O'Neill, Sir H.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfast)
Wayland, Sir William A.


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Skelton, A. N.
Wells, Sydney R.


Peake, Capt. Osbert
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Williams, Charles (Devan, Torquay)


Penny, Sir George
Smith, R.W. (Aberd-n & Kinc'dine, C.)
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Smith-Carington, Neville W.
Windsor-Clive, Lieut.-Colonel George


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Smithers, Waldron
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Power, Sir John Cecil
Somerset, Thomas
Withers, Sir John James


Pownall, Sir Assheton
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Womersley, W. J.


Purbrick, R.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Ramsbotham, H.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Wright, Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavlst'k)


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Reid, David D. (County Down)
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)



Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.
Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Reynolds, Col. Sir James
Stuart. Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Sir Frederick Thomson and Captain


Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Euan Wallace.


Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)

Colonel ASHLEY: I beg to move, inpage 19, line 24, after the word "sums," to insert the words:
not exceeding five million pounds in any one year.
This Amendment deals with paragraph (d). The Sub-section says that the Treasury may, subject to such conditions as they may determine, issue out of the Consolidated Fund of the United Kingdom
such sums as may be required by the Minister for the purchase of land or the erection of buildings for the provision of smallholdings and for such other expenses in connection with the provision of smallholdings as may be agreed by the Treasury and the Minister to be capital expenditure.
The purpose of the Amendment is to ensure that such expenditure shall not exceed £5,000,000 in any one year. I wish to limit the amount of money the Minister may use in the provision of small-holdings As the Clause stands, there is no limit at all, the only person to decide the amount is the Chancellor of the Exchequer, who is to tell the Minister of Agriculture what money he may have. I object to giving this blank cheque to the Chancellor of the Exchequer. A limit should be inserted in the Bill. No one can cay that £5,000,000 is not a considerable amount to spend in any one year. In the other paragraphs in this Sub-section a limit is inserted. In the case of the Agricultural Land Corporation a sum of £1,000,000 is fixed, while in paragraph (b) a limit of £5,000,000 is inserted; and in paragraph (c) there is a limit of £700,000. I cannot see why the Minister
has deliberately—it must have been done deliberately—omitted from the paragraph dealing with smallholdings any financial limit at all and should simply say that he wants to spend what he can induce the Treasury to allow him to spend. In these days of financial stringency we should be careful in giving a blank cheque, however desirable the object may be.
As to whether the amount of £5,000,000 is reasonable, I think it is, having regard to the objects for which the money is required, namely, the provision of smallholdings and the money which the Minister is to provide for those people who get smallholdings, which is not to exceed £50 in the aggregate or more than 30 shillings in any one week. I am almost ashamed to put in such a vast sum, and I think I am erring on the side of generosity. The real reason for my moving the Amendment is not, however, to tie the Minister down to £5,000,000 or to £4,000,000, but to get some sum inserted in this Clause. If in all the previous provisions a definite sum has been inserted, I do not see why we should not insert a definite figure in the provision which deals with smallholdings.

The CHANCELLOR of the DUCHY of LANCASTER (Mr. Attlee): I agree with the right hon. and gallant Member for the New Forest (Colonel Ashley) that the amount of £5,000,000 is not at all an ungenerous figure, but the objection to fixing any amount at all is that it sets up some sort of idea that we are going to spend the same amount in each successive year. The point is that we
want to get the development of smallholdings well on the way, and it may develop much more rapidly in one year than in another. There is no purpose served by putting a figure like this into the Bill. There is parliamentary control. We have to extract the money from the Chancellor of the Exchequer. Parliament may give a blank cheque, but the Chancellor of the Exchequer has to get it cashed somehow or another, and I think the right hon. and gallant Member will agree that my right hon. Friend is not always ready to cash a cheque. Apart from that, Parliament will be able to exercise its voice in debate every year when the Estimates are voted. I think it much better to keep the matter flexible and to leave the power in the hands of this House rather than put in a fixed annual sum.

Colonel ASHLEY: The Chancellor of the Duchy of Lancaster has not answered my question, why if you put in sums in paragraphs (a), (b) and (c) you do not put in a sum in paragraph (d)?

Mr. ATTLEE: It is because we consider this is rather a different subject matter. The smallholdings policy may develop greatly in a particular year, we cannot say to what size it will grow. There is a distinct different between the matters dealt with in this Clause.

Sir BASIL PETO: The answer of the Chancellor of the Duchy has not satisfied my objections to giving this unlimited power of expenditure to the Government under this Clause. So far we have had no indication whatever as to the expenditure which the Government contemplate in any one year, or altogether, except that in the financial memorandum to the Bill we find that the expenditure will "depend on the unsatisfied demand, but it is estimated that on an average the capital cost of every 1,000 holdings may be £1,100,000."
It may be more or less, but as to how many thousands of people or how many millions of pounds of expenditure, the House has had not the slightest idea. We have had no reply to the Amendment except the statement of the Chancellor of the Duchy, that if the House abandons its control over finance there is always the Chancellor of the Exchequer.

Mr. ATTLEE: I said precisely the opposite. I said that besides the Chancellor of the Exchequer the House of Commons will keep control over finance.

Sir B. PETO: I apologise if I have misrepresented the hon. Gentleman, but we are trying at this moment to keep control of finance to the House of Commons. If we give an absolutely blank cheque and allow this Bill to be conducted by Addison, Attlee and Company without the slightest check, I do not know where we can look for any estimate of the expenditure which the country may be incurring unless we look to the speech of the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) on the Second Reading of the Bill. He warmly commended the Bill. At the very outset of his speech he said that it was a Measure:
after my own heart
and towards the end he said:
It is a real, bold, strong Bill with the cash behind it.
What is the amount behind the small-holdings policy I do not know, unless one can gather it from the observations of the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs. He said that if we raised a loan of £200,000,000 for reclamation of land it would cost the country £5,000,000 a year, because we should probably lose 2½ per cent. That is quite a small matter. He contemplated a loan of £200,000,000. But he went on to say:
You have a debt of £7,000,000,000 for destruction. The French spent from £1,000,000,000 to £2,000,000,000 in repairing the devastation of the War. Cannot we spend £200,000,000 on our … countryside?"—[OFFICIAL REPORT, 18th November, 1930; col. 310, Vol. 245.]
That clearly shows that the right hon. Gentleman, who is believed to be really the godfather of this Bill, had very big ideas in his mind, when he was blessing the Bill at its christening, as to what the Government were going to spend. If we cannot be told how much the Government are going to spend, cannot we at least be told whether, in dealing with this huge figure of £1,100,000 for 1,000 smallholders, they are to be financed by a loan or in the normal way. Last Thursday this question was raised on the Adjournment, and the Chancellor of the Exchequer then said to the House:
The policy of the Government, as I have repeatedly stated, and as I stated on the last occasion yesterday, is that we are prepared to foster and encourage every sound and economic scheme of national development, but such schemes will be financed as they have been financed in the past. There
is no idea—it is almost a humiliation to have to say it—of putting forward a spectacular national development loan. Any scheme will have to be, first of all, very carefully considered and thoroughly sifted, and if the conclusion is reached that it would be to the national advantage that such a scheme should be promoted, then the finance of the scheme will be found in the ordinary way."—[OFFICIAL, REPORT, 5th February, 1931; cols. 2256–7, Vol. 247.]
I want to know whether this scheme for placing unemployed people by the thousand on the land is one of the schemes that have been "carefully sifted," and whether it is to be financed in the ordinary way out of current expenditure or in the way that the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs had clearly in his mind, that is, by a spectacular loan. Clearly a very spectacular loan would be required if the Government contemplated putting 100,000 people on smallholdings. It would be real Carnarvon finance. We are entitled to a good deal more information as to the scope of the Government's proposals. I wonder why they have been so obstinate in refusing to give us any indication of how many thousands of people they propose to put on the land and how many millions this scheme will cost the country. We have been refused that information in Committee and again to-day. I cannot help thinking that if they named any figure, it would be such a small figure compared with the 2,500,000 unemployed, that the Bill would seem almost ridiculous as a means of dealing with the un-employment problem. I beg the Minister to let us know the average number of people that he expects to put on the land in a year. I know that the number cannot be exactly the same every year. But is the average number to be 1,000 a year costing £1,000,000, or 10,000 costing £10,000,000, or 50,000 costing £50,000,000? Any of those figures would make a very small inroad on the total of unemployed. Surely we are entitled to know whether the money is to be raised in the ordinary way out of annual revenue, or whether it is to be left as a debt to posterity.

Mr. C. WILLIAMS: The hon. Baronet seems to think that the Government may have some idea in their minds. Those of us who have listened to the Government speeches on this and every other subject will know that the Government
rarely have any idea in their minds, and that on this particular occasion the Government mind is even more barren than usual. That is saying a very great deal. All that the Chancellor of the Duchy said was that this particular Clause was for, the purpose of an emergency. Even the Chancellor of the Duchy, who has a comparatively limited knowledge of what is going on to-day, must know that the really great national emergency is not the emergency of trying to produce more food, but of trying to save the taxpayer's money above everything else. We have been told that there are Treasury safeguards and all that sort of thing, but we have a Chancellor of the Exchequer who has very little control of the Government—never has there been one with less. The only piece of information we have had in the Debates here and in Committee, as to what the Government imagined they were going to do, was the quotation by the Minister of a certain county called Hampshire where, in the course of four years, four of these smallholdings had been provided. I believe Hampshire is a most estimable county and I have no doubt that the Small Holdings Act is administered there in an excellent way, and that everything possible is done to get people to go on the land. Four smallholdings in four years, in probably one of the best county council systems in the country! That was all that the Minister could show as to the demand for these smallholdings.
Coming to the Amendment, why in the world my right hon. Friend wants to give the Government £5,000,000 I do not know. Even the extravagant Minister of Agriculture, when the same Amendment was proposed in Committee, said that the sum was very generous. If he thinks it generous, the House may rest assured that the proposal is not merely generous, but a gross extravagance. In other words, the Minister himself does not for one minute expect to use anything near that sum. Personally I should have moved that the sum be £500,000. That would be quite ample for the present Administration. I would not willingly entrust them with £5 for this or any other purpose. I do not suppose that I can move an Amendment to the Amendment. If it were possible, I would like to omit the words "million pounds." I believe the Bill will result in complete waste and that we shall not
get any value or return for this money. It is a step in the right direction to set up a limit on this occasion, but the limit is far too high. Although I suppose I shall support the Amendment in the Lobby, because one cannot look a gift horse in the face too closely, I do so under the strongest protest. The Amendment shows the type of mind we have all too prevalent in the House on many sides—the type of mind of Minister and ex-Minister who cannot realise that there is only one essential thing, and that that is to cut down expenditure on every occasion to absolute rock bottom.

Mr. CROOM-JOHNSON: I want to refer to one point which, though it may be regarded by the Chancellor of the Duchy as a small point, is to me a point of the utmost importance. The hon. Gentleman has told us that there is no need for any sum to be mentioned here because there are two safeguards, first, the Chancellor of the Exchequer, and second, Parliamentary control. I have not been long in the House, but in common with most new Members I have watched its proceedings with close attention for a number of years, and I have watched in particular to find what form of Parliamentary control exists over the expenditure of money by the Government of the day. The situation is this: The control of this House over expenditure has diminished and is diminishing and ought to be very largely increased. Whenever any Amendment is moved which has the effect of keeping expenditure within due limits, some reason or other, differing from Amendment to Amendment, is given as an answer. The ordinary Private Member of the 'House who is desirous of doing his duty at a moment when there is a crying demand in all parts of the community for economy in our public life, finds himself without any influence, without any sort of control over national expenditure.
To give an answer of the sort we have heard to an Amendment which suggests the wildly extravagant sum of £5,000,000 as the amount to be spent, is really to talk in a world of complete unreality. Much as I dislike the figure in the Amendment, I shall be forced to vote for it because it seems to me that the time has come when all parties, if they are
going to do anything with regard to expenditure, can do it only by attempting to clip the wings of Ministers, no matter to what party they belong.

Sir ERNEST SHEPPERSON: I, for the same reasons as those given by previous speakers from this side, do not accept as a sufficient security against extravagance, the two safeguards mentioned by the Minister. The purpose of these smallholdings is to try to remedy unemployment, to some extent, and, as the hon. Member for Barnstaple (Sir B. Peto) has mentioned, 1,000 unemployed men from the industrial centres will cost £1,000,000. Without some restriction of the kind proposed there seems to be no limit to the number of unemployed men who can apply and be accepted for smallholdings. When we have the unemployment figures going up by from 10,000 to 20,000 a week, it will be seen that to get even one week's increase of unemployed men on to the land would represent a cost of £10,000,000 or more. If we have not a limit of this kind what is to be the total cost to the Exchequer? Under Clause 7, as amended, this provision is also available for agricultural workers. No doubt there will be a very great demand from unemployed men in the towns, if they find that they can go down to the country and that they will be offered a house and a holding and, directly or indirectly, a sum of about £1,000. When they go there they will have no money of their own but they will take on these smallholdings, and after a year or so they will probably lose whatever money has been given to them. They will be no worse off in the end—they will have nothing in the end, but then, they had nothing in the beginning. I anticipate that there will be a large number of applicants from the towns, anxious to try country life and to have a comfortable year or two, at the expense of the State. In the interests of the taxpayer I support the Amendment.

Question put, "That those words be there inserted in the Bill."

The House Proceeded to a Division.

Sir WILLIAM LANE MITCHELL: (seated and covered): On a point of Order. Some of us have been unable to get through the press of Members at the entrance to the Division Lobby in order
to vote. At least a dozen Members are waiting to get in now, and the doors have been locked.

Mr. SPEAKER: I cannot alter the time allowed for a Division.

The House divided: Ayes, 180; Noes, 273.

Division No. 141.]
AYES.
[6.49 p.m.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn. W. G.(Ptrsf'ld)


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Cot. Charles
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Albery, Irving James
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Peake, Capt. Osbert


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Liverp'l., W.)
Eden, Captain Anthony
Penny, Sir George


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Peto, Sir Basll E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Astor, Maj. Hn. John J. (Kent, Dover)
England, Colonel A.
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Atholl, Duchess of
Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s-M.)
Ramsbotham, H.


Atkinson, C.
Everard, W. Lindsay
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Ballile-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Reid, David D. (County Down)


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Ferguson, Sir John
Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Fielden, E. B.
Reynolds, Col. Sir James


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Flson, F. G. Clavering
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesall)


Balnlel, Lord
Ford, Sir P. J.
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Bellalrs, Commander Carlyon
Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Betterton, sir Henry B.
Galbraith, J. F. W.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Salmon, Major I.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Samuel. A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Bird, Ernest Roy
Gower, Sir Robert
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Boothby, R. J. G.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Savery, S. S.


Bowater. Col. Sir T. Vanslttart
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Boyce, Leslie
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Simms, Major-General J.


Bracken, B.
Hanbury, C.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Bellst.)


Brass, Captain Sir William
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Briscoe, Richard George
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Haslam, Henry C.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks,Newb'y)
Heneage. Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.
Smithers, Waldron


Buchan, John
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.
Somerset, Thomas


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Butler, R. A.
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Spender-Clay, Colonel H.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Campbell, E. T.
Hurst, Sir Gerald B.
Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)


Carver, Major W. H.
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Iveagh, Countess of
Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Tinne, J. A.


Cayzer, Maj. Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth,S.)
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Chamberlain,Rt.Hn.Sir J.A.(Birm., W.)
Knox, Sir Alfred
Train, J.


Chapman, Sir S.
Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Christie. J. A.
Lambert, Rt. Hon. George (S. Molton)
Turton, Robert Hugh


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Little, Sir Ernest Graham
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey
Warrender, Sir Victor


Cohen, Major J. Brunei
Lymington, Viscount
Wayland, Sir William A.


Colman, N. C. D.
McConnell, Sir Joseph
Wells, Sydney R.


Colville, Major D. J.
Macquisten, F. A.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Maltland, A. (Kent, Faveraham)
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Windsor-Cilve, Lieut.-Colonel George


Cranborne, Viscount
Margesson, Captain H. D.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Meller, R. J.
Withers, Sir John James


Crolt, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Merrlman, Sir F. Boyd
Womersley, W. J.


Crookshank, Capt. H. C.
Millar, J. D.
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Mitchell-Thomson. Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Worthington-Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Wright. Brig.-Gen. W. D. (Tavist'k)


Cunllffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)
Young. Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Dalkeith, Earl of
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)



Dalrymple-White. Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Davies, Ma]. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Muirhead, A. J.
Sir Frederick Thomson and Captain


Dawson, Sir Philip
Newton, Sir D, G. C. (Cambridge)
Sir George Bowyer.


NOES.


Adamson. Rt. Hon. W. (Flfe, West)
Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Bowerman. Rt. Hon. Charles W.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Broad, Francis Alfred


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Barnes, Alfred John
Brockway, A. Fenner


Altchlson, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Barr, James
Bromfield, William


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro)
Batey, Joseph
Bromley, J.


Alpass, J. H.
Bellamy, Albert
Brooke, W.


Angell, Sir Norman
Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Brothers, M.


Arnott, John
Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Brown, Ernest (Leith)


Aske, Sir Robert
Benson, G.
Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Blinded, James
Brown. W. J. (Wolverhampton, West)


Ayles, Walter
Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Buchanan, G.


Burgess, F. G.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Raynes, W. R.


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Richards, R.


Calne, Derwent Hall.
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Richardson, R. (Houqhton-le-Spring)


Cameron, A. G.
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Rlley, Ben (Dewsbury)


Cape, Thomas
Kinley, J.
Rlley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Kirkwood, D.
Ritson, J.


Charleton, H. C.
Knight, Holford
Romeril, H. G.


Chater, Daniel
Lang, Gordon
Rosbotham, D. S. T


Clarke, J. S.
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Rothschild, J. de


Cluse, W. S.
Lathan, G.
Rowson, Guy


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Law, A. (Rossendale)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Compton, Joseph
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Sanders, W. S.


Cove, William G.
Lawson, John James
Sawyer, G. F.


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Scott, James


Daggar, George
Leach, W.
Scrymgeour, E.


Dallas, George
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Scurr, John


Dalton, Hugh
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Sexton, Sir James


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Lees, J.
Shakespeare, Geoffrey H.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Day, Harry
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Sherwood, G. H.


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Logan, David Gilbert
Shield, George William


Dukes, C.
Longbottom, A. W.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Ede, James Chuter
Longden, F.
Shillaker, J. F.


Edmunds, J. E.
Lunn, William
Shinwell, E.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
MacDonatd, Rt. Hon. J. R. (Seaham)
Simmons, C. J.


Egan, W. H.
McEntee, V. L.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Elmley, Viscount
McKinlay, A.
Sitch, Charles H.


Foot, Isaac
MacLaren, Andrew
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Forgan, Dr. Robert
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Freeman, Peter
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Macpherson, Rt. Hon. James I.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
McShane, John James
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Gibblns, Joseph
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)
Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Snell, Harry


Gill, T. H.
Mansfield, W.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Gillett, George M.
Marcus, M.
Sorensen, R.


Glassey, A. E.
Markham, S. F.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Gossling, A. G.
Marley, J.
Stephen, Campbell


Gould, F.
Marshall, Fred
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Mathers, George
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Matters, L. W.
Sullivan, J.


Granville, E.
Maxton, James
Sutton, J. E.


Gray, Milner
Melville, Sir James
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)
Messer, Fred
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Mills, J. E.
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro'W.)
Milner, Major J.
Thorne, W. (West Ham. Plalstow)


Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Montague, Frederick
Thurtle, Ernest


Groves, Thomas E.
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Tinker, John Joseph


Grundy, Thomas W.
Morley, Ralph
Toole, Joseph


Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Tout, W. J.


Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Townend, A. E.


Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Vaughan, David


Hall, Capt. W. P. (Portsmouth, C.)
Mort, D. L.
Viant, S. P.


Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Walkden, A. G.


Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Mosley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Walker, J.


Hardle, George D.
Muff, G.
Wallace, H. W.


Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Muggeridge, H. T.
Watkins, F. C.


Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Murnin, Hugh
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline).


Haycock, A. W.
Naylor, T. E.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Hayday, Arthur
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)
Wellock, Wilfred


Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)
Nod Baker, P. J.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Henderson, Arthur, junr, (Cardiff, S.)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Oldfield, J. R.
West, F. R.


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Westwood, Joseph


Herriotts, J.
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
White, H. G.


Hirst, G. H. (York W.R. Wentworth)
Palln, John Henry
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Palmer, E. T.
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Hoffman, P. C.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Hollins, A.
Perry, S. F.
Williams. Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Hopkin, Daniel
Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Williams. T. (York. Don Valley)


Hora-Bellsha, Leslie
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Horrabin, J. F.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Pole, Major D. G.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Potts, John S.
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Isaacs, George
Price, M. P.
Wise, E. F.


Jenkins, Sir William
Pybus, Percy John
Wood, Major McKenzle (Banff)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Quibell, D. J. K.



Johnston, Thomas
Ramsav, T. B. Wilson
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Rathbone, Eleanor
Mr. Hayes and Mr. Paling.


Question, "That those words be there inserted," put, and agreed to.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I beg to move, in page 19, line 39, to leave out Sub-section (2).
7.0 p.m.
I move this Amendment for the purpose of ascertaining from the. Financial Secretary to the Treasury some more
satisfactory reasons than those which we were able to obtain in the Committee upstairs, as to why borrowing for the purposes of this Bill is limited to borrowing by means of terminable annuities for a term not exceeding 20 years. The Treasury have various devices for borrowing, both short-term and long-term, and they have selected for the purposes of this Bill what, in the first place, appears to be one of the more expensive forms of borrowing. It can only be justified if 20 years is the full life of the security on which the money is borrowed. Presumably, 20-year terminable annuities involve interest and sinking fund, the sinking fund making up the capital in 20 years, and that, inevitably, means a high rate of interest. If that is the reason of these provisions, does not that, in fact, mean that anything under this Bill which is financed out of borrowing will be charged a very high rate of interest? Is that object the Treasury policy in regard to the administration of this Bill? As the main object of this Amendment is exploratory, it must depend on what the Financial Secretary to the Treasury says in reply, and what explanation he gives us as to whether we press this Amendment to a Division or not. I move my Amendment in order that we may fully understand what is in the mind of the Treasury in this particular proposal in this part of the Bill.

The FINANCIAL SECRETARY to the TREASURY (Mr. Pethick-Lawrence): I gladly respond to the invitation of the right hon. Gentleman to give an explanation of the policy involved in this Subsection. I imagine that his intention is not to leave out the Sub-section, but to get an explanation, and that he has chosen the Parliamentary way of obtaining it. There were two policies open to the Government with regard to the financial provisions of this Bill: they could arrange that all the money required from the taxpayer should be found annually as it was needed to be forthcoming, or, on the other hand, they could arrange that the money should be borrowed. My right hon. Friend decided that, in the special circumstances of these proposals where large capital sums were involved, it would be unreasonable that the whole amount should be found out of the provision for the particular year in
which they were incurred. Taking all the facts into account, he thought a comparatively short period ought to be imposed for the repayment of the loan. While it is true that some of these assets will last considerably longer than 20 years, there are other assets from the capital expenditure on the smallholdings which will last less than 20 years, and a figure of 20 years was arrived at as a, reasonable compromise, taking all these facts into consideration. It must be remembered that there is a very definite precedent for that figure of 20 years in the telephone borrowing at the present time, and that precedent is embodied in this Bill.
The right hon. Gentleman seemed to be under the impression, first of all, that a very large amount of difference would be made in the annual charge and. secondly, that the period we were pro posing of 20 years amortisation in the Bill would involve a very high charge to the people for whom the facilities are provided. Neither is borne out by the facts. In the first place, supposing we were to make it a very large number of years, 40 instead of 20, which would be far too high, the difference would not be quite as great as some Members would imagine. The, rate of interest at the present time, including sinking fund, is about 7⅝ per cent. on a 20 years' basis, while on a 40 years' basis it would be 5½ per cent. That is taken on the basis of a 4½ per cent. rate of interest, and the difference is not quite so great as some Members would imagine. The figures I have given will be found to be correct.
The second point that the right hon. Gentleman suggested was that the whole of this amount would be imposed upon the persons using these facilities. My right hon. Friend beside me has never disguised the fact that these provisions are not expected to be entirely financially remunerative, and that there would be a charge upon the taxpayer. That has been assumed on both sides of the House, and what will happen will be that, where these facilities are provided, those persons receiving them will be expected to pay such an annual sum as is reasonable in all the circumstances, and that during the continuation of this 20 years' period the taxpayer will have a certain margin to find. That is not an unreasonable proposal because,
assuming that the 20 years are over, then there will still be something coming in from these facilities, and at that point the taxpayer will be obtaining an advantage through the shortness of the amortisation term. In other words, this is not designed as a penalty for the individual enjoying the facilities provided under the Bill, but is a safeguard for the future position of the State. It is not reasonable, in the view of my right hon. Friend the Chancellor of the Exchequer, to postpone the payment of these items too long. The figure of 20 years has been fixed as a reasonable compromise in order to meet all the requirements.

Mr. ORMSBY-GORE: I beg leave to withdraw my Amendment.
Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Captain BOURNE: I beg to move, in page 20, line 8, to leave out from the word "be" to the end of the Subsection.
I move this Amendment in order to ask for an explanation from the Financial Secretary to the Treasury. As I understand the scheme which is laid down in this Clause for financing these smallholdings, certain receipts will be paid to the Ministry in respect of the letting of the land which will be paid into the Smallholdings and Allotments Account. There will be a similar payment into the Smallholdings and Allotments Account of Scotland. The annuities which we have been discussing under the last Sub-section will be defrayed out of these accounts, so that the interest and sinking fund will be annually defrayed, and
in so far as not so defrayed, shall be defrayed out of moneys provided by Parliament for the service of the Ministry.
I will take the English case, as it is easier to state one case. The Clause goes on to say that, if those moneys are insufficient, the annuities shall be—
charged on and paid out of the Consolidated Fund, or the growing produce thereof.
Why are those last words put in? In my view, which I believe is shared by many hon. Members on this side of the House, the provision of money over and above what is received by the Minister should be defrayed annually from the Minister's Estimate. The Minister should
come to Parliament with his estimate and ask for the amount of money necessary and which he expects to spend that year and that should be his limit unless he comes to Parliament for a Supplementary Estimate. As this Clause is drafted, it will be possible, in the event of there being a deficit owing to the amount of money voted to the Minister being insufficient, to put a charge upon the Consolidated Fund without coming to Parliament. As the Financial Secretary to the Treasury knows, there are certain charges put upon the Consolidated Fund with the express intention of making it impossible to discuss them in this House except on a substantive Motion. We are very anxious to see that no part of this Bill is put in that position, and that no Government can undertake expenditure which it has not to come to this House to approve.

Captain DUGDALE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Mr. PETHICK-LAWRENCE: I quite understand the anxiety of the hon. and gallant Member in moving this Amendment, and I think that I can set his mind entirely at rest. The intention of the Government is precisely that which he has in mind. He wishes to make sure that any money which is required to make up the deficit in any one year shall be provided out of the Vote. These words are added for a technical reason. The Debt Commissioners, who are asked under a previous Sub-section to provide the money and to accept payment in the form of terminable annuities, make it a condition that they should have the security of the Consolidated Fund behind the security of the estimates for the year. The hon. Member thinks that some recalcitrant Government might try to get round the provision of Parliament and place the burden upon the Consolidated Fund. He has forgotten that, before the Consolidated Fund could be used for that purpose, the consent of the Auditor-General would have to be obtained, and no Government could go to the Auditor-General for a consent of that kind. Even if his consent were given in any case, the whole matter would almost certainly be brought to the attention of Members of Parliament in his report. Therefore, I can assure the hon. Member that the provision is exactly what he wishes to see, and that these words are only added for
the technical reason which I have given him and that there is no likelihood of evasion.

Captain BOURNE: In view of the explanation, for which I am very grateful to the hon. Gentleman, I will ask leave to withdraw my Amendment. He will admit it is not very clear on the face of it, and we wanted an adequate explanation.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

CLAUSE 23.—(Treasury concurrence.)

Captain BOURNE: I beg to move, in page 21, line 6, after the word "three," to insert the word "six."
The reason I move this Amendment is that this Clause provides that the powers of the Minister shall be exercised in accordance with such conditions as may be prescribed by the Treasury. This applies to his powers under Clauses 2, 3, 9, and 12 of this Bill, but, with regard to one of the most important Clauses of this Bill, namely, Clause 6, which may run into very large expenditure, I do not find the condition that his powers shall only be exercised by the consent of the Treasury, and I want to know why it has been left out. I have never seen a Bill in which the consent of the Treasury is so much asked as in this Bill, but it is not asked with regard to Clause 6. It seemed to me, therefore, that, where this great amount of money is going to be spent and where the Treasury is asked to interfere so much, a little more interference would not do much harm.

Captain DUGDALE: I beg to second the Amendment.

Dr. ADDISON: The reason why this particular reference to the Treasury is not inserted with regard to the powers of the Minister to provide smallholdings is that they are already exercised under the existing Act. We take power under the present Bill to exercise them under the existing Act, and the arrangements made are made with the concurrence of the Treasury, so that the present practice will continue. There is nothing new in it, and the control of the Treasury is already effectively exercised.

Amendment negatived.

CLAUSE 24.—(Application to Scotland.)

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move in page 21, line 26, after the word "reference," to insert the words "in Part II of this Act."

This is a purely drafting Amendment.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 22, line 36, after the word "fee," to insert the words:
the expression 'agricultural buildings' means buildings which are included in any agricultural land and heritages as defined in the Rating and Valuation (Apportionment) Act, 1928.
This is consequential on an earlier Amendment moved by the Minister of Agriculture in order to bring Scotland into line.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move in page 22, line 37, after the word "the," to insert the word Chartered."
Since the Bill was introduced, the Surveyors' Institution has become a chartered body; it is therefore necessary to insert this word.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 22, line 38, after the second word "the," insert the word "Chartered."—[Mr. Johnston.]

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 23, line 7, at the end, to insert the words:
(g) Sub-section (3) of Section sixteen of this Act shall apply with the substitution of a reference to the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund for any reference to the Smallholdings Account.
This deals with the authorisation of the expenditure on allotments. It has already been approved so far as England is concerned, and this brings Scotland into line.

Amendment agreed to.

The following Amendment stood upon the Order Paper: In page 22, line 18, at the end, to insert the words—


"(h) Where the Department in the exercise of any power conferred on them by any enactment erects a building on any land, in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Department of Health for Scotland, the provisions of any statutory enactment,. by-law, rule, regulation, or other provision, under whatever authority
301
made, relating to the construction of new buildings, shall, in so far as inconsistent with such plans and specifications, not apply to such building as aforesaid;
(i) Sub-section (3) of Section eighteen of the Land Settlement (Scotland) Act, 1919, shall have effect as if for the purpose therein specified there were substituted the following purposes:
(a) the provision of allotments or allotment gardens and the purchase or leasing and equipment of land therefor;
(b) the making of grants or loans to local authorities or to societies or associations having as their object or one of their objects the provision of allotments or allotment gardens in aid of expenditure by such authorities, societies, or associations in connection with the provision of allotments or allotment gardens."—[Mr. W. Adamson.]

Major ELLIOT: May I ask the Under-Secretary of State how far he proposes to move this Amendment. Perhaps he would move paragraph (h) alone so that we can consider that, because it is quite separate from paragraph (i).

Mr. JOHNSTON: The purpose of this Amendment is to give the Department power and facilities for standardising their buildings. In England this power is not required, because the Government have already power to override small petty by-laws on their land. In Scotland, we have such power under other Smallholdings Acts, and we require it here. There has been an extraordinary instance of the necessity for giving this power where, on the opposite sides of the same road, different by-laws obtain. That makes the operations of the Department exceedingly difficult. It is the Department of Health, and not the Department of Agriculture, which must be satisfied in these matters.

Mr. SPEAKER: The Amendment on the Paper will have to be divided into two, and the Under-Secretary of State will have to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, to insert paragraph (i) after the words last inserted.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 23, line 18, at the end, to insert the words:
(h) Where the Department in the exercise of any power conferred on them by any enactment erects a building on any land, in accordance with plans and specifications approved by the Department of Health for Scotland, the provisions of any statutory enactment, by-law, rule, regulation, or other
provision, under whatever authority made, relating to the construction of new buildings, shall, in so far as inconsistent with such plans and specifications, not apply to such building as aforesaid;

Major ELLIOT: No such drastic words have ever been laid before the House of Commons. The suggestion is not merely the overriding of some petty by-laws, which is a very perfunctory way of describing our local government statutes, but it may apply to every Statute passed by this House.

Mr. JOHNSTON: The hon. and gallant Gentleman himself got these powers in 1025 in the Housing (Scotland) Act.

Major ELLIOT: We were dealing there specifically with the question of housing, but this is a suggestion that the Minister of Agriculture should, in the erection of any of these smallholdings buildings, not be required to comply with any of the regulations with which every private farmer has to comply. If he cared to put up a cow-shed which did not comply with the specifications of the Milk and Dairies Act, that Act would not apply to him. He could also put up a house for an agricultural labourer without sanitary accommodation, water or drainage, and would not be obliged to observe those things which are applied to a private landlord or owner-occupier or any-body else who puts up any such building. It is true, as the Under-secretary of State says, that any buildings would have to be approved by the Department of Health. That sounds very fine and large, but who is the Department of Health? The omnipotent Pooh-Bah Secretary of State is the Department. He comes down one morning to breakfast, and says, "My dear Mr. Adamson, I feel you are being seriously hampered in your building operations by the laws which have recently been passed by the House of Commons." Mr. Secretary Adamson says, "Willie"—or words to that effect—" I fully agree, my boy." One says
to the other, "If you bring forward a submission in due course, I shall be glad to authorise it." Since the Lord Chancellor in one of Gilbert and Sullivan's operas, no more comprehensive Committee has been conceived.

Mr. MacLAREN: Scottish Home Rule.

Major ELLIOT: Even under Scottish Home Rule, the Secretary of State will have to be responsible to the Parliament of Scotland. It is suggested that no statutory enactments shall apply to the Minister. I remember the reasons which have caused this provision to be brought forward. There was an occasion upon which the Secretary of State, represented by the Department of Health, was about to serve an injunction on the Secretary of State, as represented by the Department of Agriculture, that the buildings which the Secretary of State, as represented by the Department of Agriculture, had put up did not satisfy the sanitary regulations of the Secretary of State as represented by the Department of Health. That, however, was under the salutory statutory enactments of this House, which brought security to the wretched people who are living in these houses, which they will not have if this provision is passed. The case is no doubt on the files, and the Department would be able to find it in a very short time if they liked to delve into things which are often better left unturned. The Minister should really give some further justification of the proposal which he brings forward than he has done; otherwise, I cannot see, with every desire to facilitate business, how we can let this proposal pass without a Division. It is the most far-reaching proposal which could be brought before Parliament, and it is not possible to say that it would be to the good either of the tenants who have to live in these buildings or of the farming operations which may have to he carried on in them.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I appreciate what a splendid debating point the hon. and gallant Gentleman has got, but, as a matter of fact, these powers are already possessed by the English Ministry in regard to Crown land. There is nothing new in them. We are only seeking to get for the Department in Scotland powers which are already possessed in England. No one knows better than the hon. and gallant Gentleman that it is the constant endeavour of the Department in Edinburgh not only to comply with the wishes of the local authorities but to carry out the law. This proposal arises out of a case in Haddingtonshire, where there were different by-laws operating on oppo-
site sides of a road, and it is desirable that the Department of Health should have the power to certify a certain standard of building. This would secure uniformity and save the country expense by standardisation. By-laws vary, and that means that the Department must vary its plans. As I have already said, some local authorities require certain kinds of washhouses and others do not; and there are other variations of that type. Personally, I do not think it is a matter of very great importance. The power will require to be exercised perhaps only once in a decade. It will be remembered by the hon. and gallant Member that in the Housing Act of 1925 he asked for and got similar powers, and if it is thought that the powers already possessed by local authorities ought to be safeguarded, so that the Department of Health and not the Minister of Agriculture must operate them, then we will not fight about it. But I would point out to the hon. and gallant Member and his friends that they might perhaps consider the advisability of letting this Amendment go in and consider, before the Bill goes to another place, in view of the difficulties in administration, whether on the whole it is not better that the Department in this instance as in others should have these powers.

Major ELLIOT: I can only speak again by the leave of the House, but I would point out, first, that the statement of the Under-Secretary that the powers might need to be exercised only once in a decade shows that no grave administrative inconvenience would be caused if the powers were not inserted; and, secondly, that it does cause inconvenience if farming operations have to comply with two different sets of by-laws. If these powers are so necessary and so much desired they might be brought in in a way which would allow of fuller discussion than on the Report stage, when we are anxious to get through the business of the House. There is another Scottish Bill in Committee upstairs, and the Under-Secretary might put down a new Clause to cover the point if he decides that it ought to be incorporated in the law of Scotland. It is not necessarily germane to this Bill at all.

Mr. JOHNSTON: In view of the opinion expressed by hon. Gentlemen opposite, I will withdraw the Amendment.

Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 23, line 18, at the end, to insert the words:
(i) Sub-section (3) of Section eighteen -of the Land Settlement (Scotland) Act 1919, shall have effect as if for the purpose therein specified there were substituted the following purposes:
(a) the provision of allotments or allotment gardens and the purchase or leasing and equipment of land therefor;
(b) the making of grants or loans to local authorities or to societies or associations having as their object or one of their objects the provision of allotments or allotment garden's in aid of expenditure by such authorities, societies, or associations in connection with the provision of allotments or allotment gardens.
It is the second part of the original Amendment which I am now moving, and it is moved in fulfilment of the pledge given to the hon. Member for Kincardine (Mr. Scott) and, indeed, to hon. Members on all sides of the House. It deals with allotments and makes it quite clear that the £4,000 which we have voted for allotments may be used to secure the provision of allotments.

Mr. SCOTT: In Committee I moved a Clause to deal with this matter but withdrew it on the undertaking given to me by the Under-Secretary. I have considered this new Amendment and I am of opinion that it fully implements the pledge which the Government gave. It removes any dubiety as to the purpose for which the fund referred to may be applied. I hope the passing of this Amendment will give a fillip to the allotment movement in Scotland. It is only permissive and not mandatory, but I think we may leave it with safety in the hands of the Department of Agriculture, in the belief that they will put all their strength behind it in order to develop allotments. Along with that move from the Department of Agriculture one hopes that the local authorities will now exercise the powers they have under the Act of 1926, in order that all may go forward together.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 23, line 19, to leave out the words
"Sub-section (8) of Sections," and to insert instead thereof the words "Sub-sections (8) and (9) of Section."
The necessity for this Amendment arises out of the insertion of a new Clause, Clause 7, which alters the numbers of the succeeding Clauses.

Amendment agreed to.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 23, line 20, to leave out the word "seven."

Major ELLIOT: Why is this Amendment being moved?

Mr. JOHNSTON: The remark I made a moment ago covers this Amendment also. A new Clause was inserted in the Bill, and therefore the numbers of the succeeding Clauses require alteration.

Major ELLIOT: But this is a matter of some importance. The Bill says that Section 7 shall not apply. Section 7 is the rather famous Clause giving power to provide a smallholding for an applicant who is an agricultural worker, even 'although he be not unemployed. We observed with some interest that that had been left out of the Bill, and I understood that the rather complicated procedure of re-committal and amendment which is to follow was to deal with that point.

Dr. ADDISON: I am sorry to intervene, but this relates to paragraph (h on page 23 of the Bill, where it states:
Sub-section (8) of Sections three, and Sections seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, and fifteen, and paragraph (c) of Part I of the First Schedule shall not apply.
This refers to Part I of the First Schedule. It is not Clause 7 of the Bill.

Mr. JOHNSTON: It is a purely drafting Amendment.

Major ELLIOT: It is extraordinarily complicated. Do I understand that these are sections 7, 8, 9, 10, 11 and 15 of the Schedule and not of the Bill?

Mr. JOHNSTON: Of the Schedule.

Major ELLIOT: I do not think it is by any means self-evident on the face of it.

Amendment agreed to.

Further Amendment made: In page 23, line 20, leave out the words "and
fifteen," and insert instead thereof the words "twelve, thirteen, and seventeen." —[Mr. Johnston.]

SECOND SCHEDULE.—(Minor Amendments of Small Holdings and Allotment Acts.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 26, line 13, at the end, to insert the words:
Section 61. After the word 'council,' where that word first occurs, there shall be inserted the words 'and the expression "council of a county."'
This Amendment is moved because hon. Members called my attention to the fact that in some places we have the words "county council" and in other places "council of a county," and is to make them harmonise.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move,
That the Bill be re-committed to a Committee of the whole House in respect of the Amendments to Clause 2, page 4, line 9, Clause 6, page 11, line 7, line 19, line 39, line 44, Clause 15, page 16, line 18, and the new Clause, standing on the Notice Paper in the name of Dr. Addison, and in respect of the Amendment to Clause 24, page 22, line 41, standing on the Notice Paper in the name of Mr. Secretary Adamson.

Major ELLIOT: I would like to take the opportunity of asking the Minister whether he is quite sure that the assurance he just gave about an Amendment referring to Section 7 of the Schedule and not of the Bill is correct.

Dr. ADDISON: Certainly.

Major ELLIOT: The reference was to Sections 7, 8, 9, 10, and 11 of Part I of the First Schedule, but when I turned to the First Schedule I find there are no such sections. At the time I took the assurance of the Minister on the point.

Dr. ADDISON: And I certainly gave it in good faith.

Major ELLIOT: And we realised that it was given in good faith. I can only bring this matter in by a reference to the fact that the recommittal deals in part with the Amendment standing in the name of the Secretary of State for Scotland. To put it briefly and non-technically, it is a question of the application to Scotland of the Clause allowing the Minister to make smallholdings for persons who are not unemployed.
I read it that Section 7 of the Bill was not to apply, but the Minister assured me that I was mistaken in thinking it was Section 7 of the Bill.

Dr. ADDISON: I find that the reference is to the Schedule in the Act and not to the Schedule of this Bill. I confess that, as I read the paragraph, I thought it was the First Schedule of this Bill, but on re-reading it I find that it relates to the Land Settlement Act and to the First Schedule of that Act.

Major ELLIOT: An opportunity will arise later for discussing this matter and I do not wish to pursue it further now, but I would point out that the House was misled, of course unwittingly, by the Minister, and therefore we may want to consider the matter further when we come to the appropriate point. The House was misled by the Minister's statement, which was the result, perhaps, of intervening rashly in a discussion upon a Scottish application Clause.

Bill accordingly considered in Committee.

[Sir ROBERT YOUNG in the Chair.]

CLAUSE 2.—(Power of Minister to acquire and hold land for use as demonstration farms.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 4, line 9, after the word "purchase," to insert the word "equip."
The object of this Amendment is to allow the provision made in regard to land for demonstration farms to include their equipment.

Amendment agreed to.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 6.—(Power of Minister to provide smallholdings with financial assistance for unemployed persons.)

The following Amendment stood upon the Paper:

In page 11, line 7, after the word "for" to insert the words:
enabling him to undertake the business of a smallholder, including sums for."—[Dr. Addison.]

Dr. ADDISON: A mistake has been made in putting down this Amendment, and I do not move.
I beg to move, in page 11, line 19, at the end, to insert the words:
and in the event of any difficulty in obtaining any stock required for the purpose aforesaid the Minister may arrange for the production thereof by any local authority, society, or person, and for the provision of the equipment necessary for that purpose upon such terms as may be agreed between him and the local authority, society, or person.
This Amendment is moved to meet any difficulty that may arise in obtaining any stock, and makes provision of the necessary equipment upon such terms as may be agreed between the Minister and the local authorities. These words make the point quite clear.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 11, line 39, after the word "require," to insert the words:
for themselves or for their dependants.
This Amendment is moved in order to implement an undertaking which has already been given.

Amendment agreed to.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 11, line 44, to leave out the words "for them" and insert instead thereof the words:
(a) for any person desirous of obtaining a smallholding under this section who is, in the opinion of the Minister, likely to become suitable as a tenant of such a holding; and
(b) for not more than one dependant of any such person or of any person for whom a smallholding has been provided under this section.
In this section the expression "dependant" means, in relation to any person, the husband, wife, son, or daughter (including a step-son or step-daughter an adopted son or daughter) of that person.
These words are proposed in order to carry out what has already been arranged.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause," put, and negatived.

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Mr. R. W. SMITH: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 8, after the word "daughter," to insert the words "or grandchild."
I think it is necessary to insert these words in order to make the Amendment clear.

Dr. ADDISON: I think we must draw the line somewhere. In my Amendment we have taken the usual classification, and the Amendment to the proposed Amendment seems to me to be rather stretching a fine point.

Mr. SMITH: I beg to ask leave to withdraw my Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

Amendment to proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 15.— (Power of Minister to defray losses incurred by local authorities in providing allotment gardens for unemployed persons.)

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, in page 16, line 18, to leave out from the beginning to the word "without" in line 22, and to insert instead thereof the words:
(5) The Minister may, after the date of the commencement of this Act, approve proposals and estimates submitted to him for the purposes of this section before that date, but where the land to which any proposals relate has been acquired before the first day of January, nineteen hundred and thirty-one, or is after the commencement of this Act acquired.
This is an Amendment to make clear the power of the Minister to defray the losses incurred by local authorities in providing allotment gardens for unemployed persons. If a number of authorities wish to enter into contracts to purchase land for allotments, they can do so under this proposal.

Mr. GUINNESS: I do not object to allotment gardens for unemployed persons, but I wish to protest against the financial precedent which appears to be created by this procedure. As I understand this Amendment, it gives retrospective sanction to expenditure which has been incurred lay local authorities on the authority of the Minister. I should like to have that point cleared up. I admit that this proposal is within the four corners of the scheme set out in the Bill, and it comes under the organisation which the Minister has created. After what the Minister has said I have a very
strong conviction that this expenditure has only been incurred by the local authorities on the understanding that they would be repaid under the provisions of this Bill. I do not wish to discuss the point any further, but I desire to register a strong protest against the Amendment.

Sir DOUGLAS NEWTON: We have no information whatever As to the local authorities who have spent this money, as to the amount of money they have spent, or what commitments they have incurred.

Dr. ADDISON: We undertake by this Bill to provide seeds and fertilisers for allotment holders. I quite recognise the difficulties which have been pointed out.

Lieut.-Colonel Sir FREDERICK HALL: According to the arrangement now suggested, any Government in power can delegate authority to local authorities to do what they like. Practically the local authorities are being told that, although they may meet with a certain amount of opposition, the Government will be able to put that right. I have always been bitterly opposed to retrospective legislation, which is one of the worst things that can happen. I am entirely opposed to it, and I am particularly opposed to it when a Member of the Government takes power unto himself to say that this or that thing may

be done. In those circumstances what would be the position of the local authorities? Somebody would have to discharge their accounts, and are we to say that it the local authorities do not pay the Government will pay? I hope that what is now proposed will not be taken as a precedent, as I do not want anyone to be able in the future to say: "Such a thing was done on the 10th of February, 1931." It is on that account that I raise my protest, and I bitterly resent the action which has been taken by the Government.

Mr. R.. W. SMITH: I want to protest against this Clause. I do not want to take up the time of the Committee, but the Minister says that the reason for this Clause is largely because the sowing season is approaching. If the Government had introduced this Measure at a reasonable time, when we asked them for a Measure relating to agriculture, they would have been able to obtain a Measure in sufficient time to avoid the necessity for this Clause.

Question, "That the words proposed to be left out stand part of the Clause," put, and negatived.

Question put, "That these words be there inserted."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 260; Noes, 144.

Division No. 142.]
AYES.
[8.1 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Glassey, A. E.


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Caine, Derwent Hall-
Gossling. A. G.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Cameron, A. G.
Gould, F.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Caps. Thomas
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)


Angell, Sir Norman
Charleton, H. C.
Granville, E.


Arnott, John
Clarke, J. S.
Gray, Milner


Aske, Sir Robert
Cluse, W. S.
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)


Ayles, Walter
Compton. Joseph
Grilfiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Cove, William G.
Groves, Thomas E.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Grundy Thomas W.


Barnes, Alfred John
Daggar, George
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)


Batey, Joseph
Dallas, George
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Beckett, John (Camberwell, Peckham)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)


Bellamy, Albert
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Day, Harry
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Benson, G.
Dukes, C.
Hardle, George D.


Blindell, James
Ede, James Chuter
Harris, Percy A.


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Edmunds, J. E.
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Broad, Francis Alfred
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Haycock, A. W.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Egan, W. H.
Heyday, Arthur


Bromfield, William
Elmley, Viscount
Hayes, John Henry


Bromley, J.
Foot, Isaac
Henderson, Right Hon. A. (Burnley)


Brooke, W.
Forgan, Dr. Robert
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Brothers, M.
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham. Upton)
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J, (South Ayrshire)
Gibbins, Joseph
Herriotts, J.


Buchanan, G.
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)
Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)


Burgess, F. G.
Gill, T. H.
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)


Hoffman, P. C.
Maxton, James
Shield, George William


Holline, A.
Melville, Sir James
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


Hopkin, Daniel
Middleton, G.
Shillaker, J. F.


Hore-Bellsha, Leslie
Milner, Major J.
Shinwell, E.


Horrabin, J. F.
Montague, Frederick
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Hudson, James H. (Huodersfield)
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Simmons, C. J.


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Morley, Ralph
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Isaacs, George
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Sitch, Charles H.


Jenkins, Sir William
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Johnston, Thomas
Mort, D. L.
Smith, H. B. Lees. (Keighley)


Jones, F. Llewellyn- (Flint)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Motley, Sir Oswald (Smethwick)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, S[...]vertown)
Muff, G.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Murnin, Hugh
Sorensen, R.


Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Noel Baker, P. J.
Stamford, Thomas W.


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Stephen, Campbell


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Oldfield, J. R.
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Kinley, J.
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Strauss, G. R.


Kirkwood, D.
Oliver, p. M. (Man., Blackley)
Sullivan, J.


Knight, Holford
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Sutton, J. E.


Lang, Gordon
Palln, John Henry
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Paling, Wilfrid
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Lathan, G.
Parkinson, John Allen (Wigan)
Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Perry, S. F.
Tinker, John Joseph


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Toole, Joseph


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Tout, W. J.


Lawther W. (Barnard Castle)
Phillips, Dr. Marlon
Townend, A. E.


Leach, W.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Vaughan, David


Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Pole, Major D. G.
Viant, S. P.


Leo, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Potts, John S.
Walkden, A. G.


Lees, J.
Price, M. P.
Walker, J.


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Pybus, Percy John
Wallace H. W.


Lloyd, C. Ellis
Quibell, D. J. K.
Watkins. F. C.


Logan, David Gilbert
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Longbottom, A. W.
Rathbone, Eleanor
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Longden, F.
Raynes, W. R.
Wellock, Wilfred


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Richards, R.
Welsh, James (Paisley)


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


McEntee, V. L.
Rlley, Ben (Dewsbury)
West, F. R.


McKinlay, A.
Rlley, F, F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Westwood, Joseph


MacLaren, Andrew
Ritson, J.
White, H. G.


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Romeril, H. G.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


McShane, John James
Rowson, Guy
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. sir H. (Darwen)
Williams, T. (York. Don Valley)


Mander, Geoffrey Is M.
Sanders, W. S.
Wilson. C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Mansfield, W.
Sawyer, G. F.
Wilson, J- (Oldham)


Marcus, M.
Scott, James
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Markham, S. F.
Scrymgeour, E.
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Marley, J.
Scurr, John
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Marshall, Fred
Sexton, Sir James



Mathers, George
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Matters, L. W.
Sherwood, G. H.
Mr. Ben Smith and Mr. Thurtle.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S.)
England, Colonel A.


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Chamberlain, Rt.Hn. Sir J.A.(Birm.,W.)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset,Weston-s.-M.)


Albery, Irving James
Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Everard, W. Lindsay


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Chapman, Sir S.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.


Atkinson, C.
Christle, J. A.
Ferguson. Sir John


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Fermoy, Lord


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Clydesdale, Marquess of
Fielden, E. B.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Cobb, Sir Cyril
Fison, F. G, Clavering


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Ford, Sir P. J.


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Forestler-Walker, Sir L.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Colville, Major D. J.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.


Boothby, R. J. G.
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Galbraith, J. F. W.


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Cranborne, Viscount
Gower, Sir Robert


Boyce, Leslie
Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)


Bracken, B.
Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.


Braithwalte, Major A. N.
Crookshank, Cot.H.(Lindsey,Gainsbro)
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)


Briscoe, Richard George
Dalkeith, Earl of
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Hall, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
Hanbury, C.


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Campbell, E. T.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)


Carver, Major W. H.
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Haslam, Henry C.


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney,N.)




Iveagh, Countess of
Peaks, Capt. Osbert
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Penny, Sir George
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)


Kindersley, Major G. M.
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Southby, Commander A. R. J.


Lamb, Sir J. Q.
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Stanley, Lord (Fylde)


Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)
Ramsbotham, H.
Sucter Rear-Admiral M. F.


Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Rawson, Sir Cooper
Thomson, Sir F.


Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)
Reid, David D. (County Down)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of


Llewellin, Major J. J.
Remer, John R.
Todd, Capt. A. J.


McConnell, Sir Joseph
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Train, J.


Macquisten, F. A.
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)


Makins, Brigadier-General E.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Ward, Lieut.-Cot. Sir A. Lambert


Merriman, Sir F. Boyd
Salmon, Major I.
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.


Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Warrender, sir Victor


Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.
Savery, S. S.
Wayland, Sir William A.


Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome
Wells, Sydney R.


Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)
Simms, Major-General J.
Windsor-Cilve, Lieut.-Colonel George


Muirhead, A. J.
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfst)
Withers, Sir John James


Nelson, Sir Frank
Skelton, A. N.
Womersley, W. J.


Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


O'Connor, T. J.
Smith, R. W.(Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)



O'Neill, Sir H.
Smithers, Waldron
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Somerset, Thomas
Captain Margesson and Captain Sir George Bowyer.


Question put, and agreed to.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

CLAUSE 24.—(Application to Scotland.)

Dr. ADDISON: I want to apologise to the hon. and gallant Gentleman the Member for Kelvingrove (Major Elliot) for something which I said to him in error in regard to one of the last Amendments to this Clause. I had not read it myself, but the whole point is that this Clause is the adaptation Clause, and the reference to Clause 7 is necessary because of the new Clause 7.

Major ELLIOT: I am much obliged to the Minister, and I am sure the whole Committee is grateful for his explanation. It will be for the convenience of those who are following the Debate in Scotland and elsewhere, to have it.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I beg to move, in page 22, line 41, to leave out from the word "six," to the end of the paragraph, and to insert instead thereof the words:
and section seven of this Act shall not apply, but the department shall have power to provide, in accordance with the provisions of the Small Holdings Colonies Acts, 1916 and 1918, or of the Small Landholders (Scotland) Acts, 1886 to 1919, either on land belonging to the department or on land belonging to another person, a holding for an unemployed person within the meaning of the said sub-section (1) or for an agricultural worker, notwithstanding that such unemployed person or agricultural worker would be unable to cultivate the holding unless the facilities set forth in sub-section (2) of the said section six were extended to him.
(g) Sub-sections (2), (3), and (4) of section six of this Act shall have effect as if for any reference to the provision under the powers conferred by that section of a
smallholding for an unemployed person, there were substituted a reference to the provision under the power conferred by the immediately preceding paragraph of a holding for an unemployed person or an agricultural worker, and any reference to the said section six shall include a reference to the immediately preceding paragraph.
This is a rather terrifying labyrinth of words, but it apparently is the normal way of stating adequately the position. By Sub-section (1) of Clause 6, power is taken to provide smallholdings and to give financial assistance to unemployed persons, and that Sub-section was adapted for Scotland by Clause 24, paragraph (f). In the course of the discussion in the Committee upstairs, an Amendment was carried to add the words "agricultural worker" to the Clause which provides for smallholdings and for financial assistance. That being so, a new Clause—Clause 7—was imported into the Bill which therefore altered the notation of all the Clauses after Clause 6. It is now necessary to ensure that the financial assistance which it was intended should be given to unemployed persons, should be given also to agricultural workers. The Amendment which I am now moving is designed to do no more than to ensure that the consequences of the Amendment carried in the Committee upstairs shall be logically, accurately, and definitely translated into the other Clauses of the Bill.

Major ELLIOT: I desire to make a few general references to the subject on which the Under-Secretary has just spoken, and this seems to me to be the most suitable occasion from the point of view of the House to discuss the prin-
ciple involved. As I understand it—and the Government Bench will pardon me if I desire to be quite sure that I do understand it, in view of the fact that we have already had a slight difficulty this evening—the Clause moved from the Liberal benches in Committee was moved because it was desired to add, to the provision made for the smallholdings for unemployed people, all agricultural workers, whether unemployed or not. That broadening of the basis of the Bill was welcomed by the Committee as a, whole, and the Minister, who at the time thought that he would require to place safeguards upon this extension, has found on reflection that those safeguards will not be necessary. The Financial Resolution which is incorporated in the Bill shows a alight difference as between the Scottish and the English portions. Paragraph (e), which is the Scottish portion, speaks of:
Such sums as may be required by the Department of Agriculture for Scotland for the purchase of land or the erection of buildings for the provision of holdings for unemploped persons.
whereas the corresponding paragraph, (d), which relates to England, speaks of:
Such sums as may be required by the Minister for the purchase of land or the erection of buildings for the provision of smallholdings.
It will, therefore, be clear that the Scottish portion is fettered by the words "holdings for unemployed persons," which are absent from the English portion, and, therefore, whatever alteration we might make in the Bill could not help the position in Scotland, because that is governed by the Financial Resolution, which is incorporated in the present Clause 21 of the Bill. That being so, the Secretary of State for Scotland has had to adopt the somewhat complicated measure of feeding the money required into the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund, and drawing from the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund the sums which he will require to carry out the settlement of those persons, not unemployed, who are being brought in by the present provision. If this be so, we can proceed to the Amendments which I and some others of my hon. Friends have upon the Paper.
I should like to say, in the first place, that we on this side of the House fully appreciate the desirability of bringing in the agricultural worker, whether
employed or unemployed. If this Bill is to deal with the question of land settlement, it would obviously be foolish to exclude from land settlement those who, of all people, would be most likely to take advantage of it, and, indeed, if that were done, there would be great resentment throughout the country as a whole. At the present time there are 2,600,000 people registered as unemployed. There are in addition some 1,200,000 agricultural workers, which makes 3,800,000. Then there are all those other persons who may be unemployed, although they do not appear on any register. They may easily be put down at another 1,000,000, which brings the total to 4,800,000; and to attempt to cut a loaf which cannot be more than 100,000 holdings to cover all this vast mass of persons will, it seems to me, be a matter of great administrative difficulty in the future. Amendments will have to be made later to deal with them, but at the moment the point is that it is necessary to omit these words in order to bring the Scottish agricultural worker into the same position in which the English agricultural worker has been placed. That alteration was made in Committee with good will on all sides, and I am certain that the House also will agree with the same good will in all quarters to the alteration which is at present being made as regards Scottish agriculture.

Mr. SCOTT: I agree with the hon. and gallant Member who has just spoken that the method adopted by the Government is necessarily a complicated method, but no doubt they are advised that it is the only method by which the money destined for this purpose can be obtained for Scotland. Speaking for the party which at the moment I happen to be leading, I may say that we entirely approve of the proposals in this Clause. My purpose in intervening is to raise a general point, following the example of the hon. and gallant Member who has just spoken. I should like to get From the Government an assurance that what they are going to do is to settle these unemployed men and agricultural workers under the tenure of the Small Holdings Acts, and not merely as tenants of the Department of Agriculture. That is a very vital point, because we have in Scotland already some 50,000 smallholders, and we on these benches would like to be assured that the intention of
the Government is to establish these new holders under the existing Acts, with all the privileges and benefits which those Acts confer—that is to say, they would have security of tenure, fair rents, and full compensation for improvements. One thing we do not want, and that is that these new holders should be mere tenants under the State with no rights whatever, with their tenure purely at the dictation of the officials of the Department of Agriculture; and, particularly, that these holdings should not be let at equipped rents, a method recently adopted by the Department of Agriculture. As the hon. Gentleman knows, that matter is to be raised very shortly in Committee on another Bill, and it will be a great mistake if the Department has any intention of perpetuating a system which is thoroughly unsound, and which we hope very shortly to get reversed. I should like to have an assurance from the Government that what they intend to do is to establish these new holders under the small Holdings Acts, and I should say, speaking again for the party which I happen at the moment to be leading, that it would be a condition of support for this Clause that we should have an assurance of that sort.

Colonel ASHLEY: When we are dealing with an extremely complicated Amendment such as this, I think we should have a Law Officer of the Crown here. I am sure that no one but a trained lawyer can understand in the least what paragraph (g) means. I sincerely hope that some explanation will be given to Members like myself who are not learned in the law, so that we may understand that paragraph, which I do not expect even you, Sir, with all your experience can understand in the least. It says that these Sections shall not mean what they are said to mean, but shall mean what Sub-section (1) says. What in the name of common sense does it mean? I do not criticise this, because I have not the remotest idea what it is. If the Secretary of State can explain it, I will do my best to understand it, but at present I have not the remotest idea what it all means.

Mr. JOHNSTON: I will give the right hon. and gallant Gentleman the satisfac-
tion of saying that when I first saw this paragraph, I felt exactly as he feels, but we had a most careful examination and consultation with the Law Officers, and we are satisfied that it is purely consequential and drafting, and is designed to give effect to a decision that was unanimously come to in Committee. It was decided to import a fresh class of persons who should receive the benefit of smallholdings. The Bill as it was introduced simply covered unemployed persons, but upstairs, by common agreement, there was added a class of agricultural workers and a new Clause had to he inserted. In England, smallholdings are dealt with by the Minister through the county councils. We have not got that system, in Scotland at all. We have one omnium, gatherum, called the Agriculture (Scotland) Fund, administered by the Department of Agriculture, into which the money voted by Parliament for the provisions of smallholdings to unemployed persons and to agricultural workers under the Bill must be paid. It is purely to give legal effect to the decision of the Committee that this paragraph has been inserted. I hope I have made that clear.
The hon. Member for Kincardineshire (Mr. Scott) asked as to the conditions on which unemployed persons and farm workers could be settled. Until a man has proved himself suitable, it would be highly undesirable to give a statutory direction to the effect that every man should receive landholders' tenure, but, apart from that, it is the intention of the Government to see to it that persons who are found suitable are put in. It is the settled policy of all parties in the State that for future holdings now being created by the Department of Agriculture, landholders' tenure should be accorded, but it is felt that it would be undesirable to give a statutory direction of compulsion in every case until a man has shown that he intends to remain a landholder.

Question proposed, "That those words be there inserted."

Mr. R. W. SMITH: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 4, to leave out the word "either."
This is the first of two Amendments which hang together, and deal with the same point. We have two forms of small landholders in Scotland, those set up by the Department of Agriculture on land belonging to the Department, and those set up on private estates. I rather dread to mention the word, but there is a report known as the Nairne report, and whenever we mention it in the House or anywhere near it, it seems rather to frighten English Members. The first recommendation of that committee was that the creation by the State of smallholdings on privately-owned estates should be discontinued in the Lowlands. My Amendment is to carry out that recommendation. It is simply that these unemployed persons and agricultural workers should be settled on land that belongs to the Department and not on private estates so as to discontinue a system which has worked so unsatisfactorily in the past.

Major COLVILLE: I support the Amendment to the proposed Amendment. It is not our intention to limit the operation of the Act, but to see that it is worked smoothly. It was very clearly brought out in the Nairne report that the system of dual ownership was working out unsatisfactorily. The tenants did not like it because they thought they had to pay two rents, one for buildings and one for land. The report recommended clearly that further holdings should be on land owned by the Department of Agriculture for Scotland. The Department is already the largest landowner in Scotland and owns over 300,000 acres, so that they have a considerable area of land to work upon. I support the Amendment to the proposed Amendment in the belief that it will make for smooth running, and that the system of dual ownership should not be enlarged when increasing the number of small landholders.

Mr. JOHNSTON: It would certainly be highly desirable, particularly considering some of the classes of applicants, that, as far as possible, the holder should be placed upon publicly-owned land. It is the settled policy of the Government to see that as much land as possible is acquired for public purposes, but there might be cases, particularly in the Highland areas, where it would unduly restrict the opportunities afforded
by this Bill to provide settlements for farm workers and unemployed persons, if the hon. Gentleman's Amendment were accepted. If he will rest satisfied with the statement that it is the obvious intention of the Government to secure as much land as possible for the State, and to settle as many of these holders as possible on publicly-owned land, I think he will find that it will meet his case.

Major ELLIOT: Naturally, we cannot accept what has fallen from the Minister that it is desirable that the State should own as much land as possible, and that all cultivators in Scotland should not be freeholders, but should be tenants of the State. That would not, I think, really commend itself to the party below the Gangway either, even amongst the shreds and patches of the principles which they preserve upon this subject. [An HON. MEMBER: "Shame!"] This is not in any way a reflection upon their moral character. The question of private ownership is enormously complicated as soon as it comes to a question of land. The ownership of a piece of land owned by a landlord, interfered with by the State, further interfered with by the tenant and super-interfered with by a marketing board, but not in any way interfered with through imports coming from abroad—these principles can be reconciled in the Liberal attitude towards a piece of land. We sympathise with them in their difficulty. The proposals of the Nairne Committee were that the State should buy a piece of land and that the tenants should know to whom they had to look. We are of opinion in regard to this question that to have the freehold held by the State and the tenancy by the tenant is much to be preferred. The Under-Secretary of State says that it is desired that the dual ownership system should not be preserved. Upon that matter we are agreed, and perhaps on that assurance my hon. Friend might. be able to withdraw his Amendment. I think that in so far as we are agreed to any extent on any subject relating to land, it is sufficiently a miracle that it should be greeted with acclamation.

Mr. SCOTT: I cannot allow the principles of the Liberal party to be stated by the hon. and gallant Member for Kelvingrove (Major Elliot). He has grossly mis-stated them in referring to
them as shreds and patches. I should like to dissociate myself from the idea that it is part of Liberal principles or policy to acquire as much land as possible for the State, leading ultimately to the total nationalisation of the land of this country. That is no part of Liberal policy as far as I understand it. What Liberals want to secure—

The CHAIRMAN: The hon. Member has made his disclaimer. He is out of order in attempting to explain the policy of his party.

Mr. SCOTT: I do not wish to transgress further, but I want to make the position clear concerning the remarks of the hon. Member for Central Aberdeen (Mr. R. W. Smith), who has quoted from the report of the Nairne Committee.

Mr. STEPHEN: Your friends on those benches do not agree with you.

Mr. SCOTT: I am speaking, as the House may see, for a united party which cannot be cajoled or induced in any way to support principles with which it disagrees. The hon. Member for Central Aberdeen in support of his Amendment quoted from the Report of the Nairne Committee, and it is noticeable that every agricultural Member from above the Gangway always refers to the Report of the Nairne Committee in the same breath and tone—rather a hushed tone—as he would refer to the family Bible. The committee, in addition to making the recommendation which the hon. Member pointed out, also gave a high testimonial to the beneficial effect under the Smallholders Acts throughout Scotland. The hon. Member did not quote that portion of the Report. When the committee proceed to suggest that there should be no extension of the smallholding tenancy in the southern counties of Scotland—they even go further, and suggest that there should he no extension in the less mountainous parts of Northern Scotland—then we part company with them at once. The Amendment to the Amendment should be resisted, and I would remind the hon. Gentleman representing the Government that he has powers to schedule land belonging to other persons, and that he ought to exercise the powers which were given to the Government in the 1911 Act, which was passed by a Liberal Government. Let
him use those powers and take all the land he requires for the purpose of implementing the obligations under this Bill, and in the knowledge that he can take both land and buildings—I am not going to say without paying for them—for the use of the smallholders who are to be placed on the land. If the landlord gets a fair rent for the use of the buildings and the land, it is all that he is entitled to receive. I suggest that the Government should resist the Amendment to the Amendment and proceed under the powers which they possess in the 1911 Act.

The CHAIRMAN: Does the hon. Member wish to withdraw his Amendment?

Mr. R. W. SMITH: I beg to ask leave to withdraw the Amendment to the proposed Amendment.

Amendment to the proposed Amendment, by leave, withdrawn.

Major ELLIOT: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Amendment, in line 5, to leave out from the word "for" to the word "notwithstanding," in line 7, and to insert instead thereof the words "any person."
This Amendment to the proposed Amendment is moved in order to bring within the scope of the Bill, originally a Bill for the settlement of unemployed persons upon the land of Great Britain, persons who are not unemployed. It is clear that the Committee were faced with a fundamentally absurd proposal. That is to say, the Bill seriously held out the prospect of being able to deal with a substantial portion of the unemployed in this country by means of settling people upon the land, but the Committee stage had not proceeded very far before it was obvious that that contention could not be sustained and that it was, in fact, a Bill for the promotion of smallholdings. Then the question arose, this is an agricultural Bill, a land settlement Bill. Who, then, were the most suitable persons to be placed upon the land? The answer became self-evident, namely, those who had worked upon the land. The new Clause had only to be moved to meet with acceptance in all parts of the Committee, for it was ridiculous to say that you would bring unemployed men from the cities and settle them upon the
land over the heads of men who had been spending their lives in working upon the land.
The Minister in charge of the Bill warned the Committee that it was unlikely that he would receive sufficient Treasury support to enable him to make any substantial inroads upon the numbers of those working upon the land and who might desire smallholdings. He suggested that it might be necessary to safeguard the position by Amendments on the Report stage, but it was clear when the Order Paper was scrutinised that he had not found it necessary to take those further precautions. It was un-necessary. This is merely an enabling Bill for the Minister. In Clause 16, which is the important and operative Clause it is provided that
The Minister may make grants or advances to any county council etc.
in regard to allotments, and the moneys may provide a certain number of smallholdings. Clause 6 says that the Minister shall have power to provide smallholdings for certain persons. All these things are subject to the overriding veto of the Treasury. The fact is that in. Scotland we could have done nearly everything that there is in this Bill at any time for years past, save the small question of making an advance during a certain period of one pound a week to certain persons. We could have done all this by an increased vote from the Treasury.

Mr. JOHNSTON: What about allotments?

Major ELLIOT: There are certain arrangements in regard to allotments for which we should have required special legislative powers.

Mr. SCOTT: Why did not the last Government do it?

Major ELLIOT: The last Government did not do it for the reason that the hon. Member's Government did not do it, and for the reason that the present Government will not do it, because the Chancellor of the Exchequer says "No." It is very interesting to note that when the hon. Member's own leader was in culties in carrying out the sort of process which he was urged to adopt—

The CHAIRMAN: I am afraid that we are getting wide of the Amendment.

Major ELLIOT: My point is that previous Governments found the same difficulty in providing finance, and that the Coalition Government, presided over by the right hon. Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), applied the axe to smallholdings, cut down smallholdings and the finance of smallholdings, with the result that the creation of smallholdings and land settlement did not take place. All the things which indicate difficulties before the Minister in carrying out this work will be chiefly the difficulty of finance. The Minister has taken a great category of persons, 2,600,000 unemployed persons, who are eligible for benefit under this Clause. He has added to that number a further great category of agricultural workers.

Mr. SCOTT: This part of the Bill refers only to Scotland. The hon. and gallant Member is giving the figures for Great Britain.

Major ELLIOT: I am giving the figures for Great Britain because I desire that the Minister should consider whether the Amendment which I am moving and which applies to Scotland would not be a suitable Amendment to apply to the whole of Great Britain. The Minister has brought in a further category, those whom he deems to be unemployed. [An HON. MEMBER: "Another million!"] I do not know what the number may be. Those whom the Minister may deem to be unemployed may cover a very wide field. Then there are those whom the Minister may deem to be agricultural workers. What is the point of these figures Let us have the simple category that we have had in Scotland, and under which we have worked for many years, namely, the category of the person. If the Minister wishes to take so great a responsibility, let him take the whole responsibility. Let him simply make out a list. The question then will not be whether a person is unemployed, or has been unemployed, or is deemed to be unemployed, or is an agricultural worker, has been an agricultural worker, or is deemed to be an agricultural worker. These things will not apply. The Minister will make out his list and from that list he will take, without fettering himself with administrative webs, those persons in re-
gard to whom the Chancellor of the Exchequer finds enough money to enable them to be settled upon the land.
That is briefly the purpose of the Amendment which we are bringing forward. It may be said that it is broadening the matter too much. It is not broadening the matter too much to suggest that the percentage to be taken off the existing list will be so small that the power of choice of the Minister will not make any difference to the real numbers of persons who come either to be settled upon the land or who can get on to such a list with any immediate prospect of getting smallholdings hereafter. The hon. Member for Kincardine (Mr. Scott) made the suggestion that those already on the list should have a chance of getting these facilities, but he withdrew that or, rather, he ran away from it, in a very unusual fashion for him, on the assurance of the Minister that nearly all those persons were covered under the existing two categories of unemployed persons and agricultural workers.

Mr. SCOTT: What more did I want?

Major ELLIOT: The hon. Member might have thought for the minority. I thought that his party were particularly interested in the rights of minorities. Merely to say that a minority is to be unjustly or badly treated and is not to have certain facilities that are being found for everyone else, I should have thought would have struck right home to the heart of the hon. Member for Kincardine and those who sit with him. But he now says, in effect, that it does not matter. He accepts the old motto of Mr. Birrell, that: "Minorities must suffer; it is the badge of their tribe." It does not matter. Only 10 per cent. of these people are to suffer this injustice. Only 10 per cent. of these people, who have been waiting for years, are to suffer. Only 10 per cent. of the people who have been denied these facilities by the Government of which his present leader was the head, and by successive Governments, are still to be baulked and to be cheated of their hopes. That, I suppose, is a small thing. Only 600 or 700 men are to suffer. Let us make a stand for those 600 or 700 men. Why should it be necessary for me to plead with the Liberal party that the proposal which they put forward should be stood to in the Lobby?

Mr. SCOTT: The hon. and gallant Member is caricaturing the whole situation. I received a definite assurance from the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland that practically 90 per cent. will receive consideration for their applications. With regard to the remaining 10 per cent. it was represented that their case was not urgent and that their applications would not be entertained.

Mr. JOHNSTON: They are not eligible.

Major ELLIOT: I do not want to stress the matter unduly. The proposals of the Government have been transformed entirely during the passage of this Bill through Committee. From a Bill dealing with unemployment relief they have become a land settlement Bill, and as a Land Settlement Bill the proposals are not satisfactory. This Amendment is moved in order to make them more satisfactory.

Mr. JOHNSTON: It is perhaps too much to ask the hon. and gallant Member to allow us to pass from this point, but may I assure him that the doleful picture he has painted of the situation as it now stands under the Bill has little or no justification. He omitted to note altogether the fact that we have some 4,000 approved applicants on our departmental list, and if 90 per cent. of those applicants are eligible it will tax the resources of the Department for a very considerable time to find suitable land and the necessary homes and equipment for them. If, in addition to this number already on the approved list, we bring in agricultural workers, many of whom are unfortunately unemployed at the moment and who, obviously, are persons to whom any responsible Ministry would give priority and preference in a matter of this kind, it will be seen, if we add these two classes together, that is, the approved applicants already on our list and the farm workers, a number of whom are unemployed, that we shall have as much on our hands as will tax the resources of the Department for a very long time to come.
9.0 p.m.
If the Amendment to the proposed Amendment were accepted we should have a flood of thousands of additional applicants, many of whom would be doomed to disappointment. The very examination of their claims, the clerical work, would unnecessarily add to the difficulties of the Department. If that
be so, and it is a reasonable statement of the case, it would obviously be unnecessary and unwise to extend further the list which is wide enough already and which will tax our resources for a considerable period. In these circumstances I suggest to the hon. and gallant Member, who is as anxious as anyone for the most efficient use shall be made of this Bill, that he should not unnecessarily clog the machinery and swell the application list, but allow the Minister to deal with registered applicants already on our lists plus the agricultural workers who were added with cordial unanimity in the Committee upstairs.

Mr. BOOTH BY: The Under-Secretary of State has not dealt with what seems to me to be the real point of the Amendment to the proposed Amendment, and it is this. Why make this legislation unnecessarily complicated. This is a Bill upon which may be based a whole series of land settlement Bills, extending over many years, and it would be much better to lay down the general principle and say that land settlement should apply to any person who in the opinion of the responsible Minister is a suitable applicant and well qualified for land settlement. The Under-Secretary says that he will be hard put to it to find positions for those who are already on the list, and he mentioned a figure of 4,000. That is probably the case; but I cannot see the reason for excluding these people when you have included large categories amongst the unemployed and agricultural workers who are deemed to be agricultural workers. Why should you exclude any substantial section of the community which may contain people who are perhaps better qualified than anybody else to be settled in smallholdings? I support the Amendment for two reasons. In the first place, because I believe it is necessary to set a precedent in the matter of Land Settlement Bills so that they will be able to be applied in the future to the whole population. Of course, the agricultural worker who is unemployed must be a first choice in any scheme of land settlement, but those who have the cause of land settlement at heart must believe that this is one method of evacuating the towns and getting the people to live in the country. In the second place, I support the
Amendment because this legislation is so complicated, and I see no reason why the Minister should handicap himself in this way for no purpose, as far as I can see.

Amendment to proposed Amendment, negatived.

Clause, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

NEW CLAUSE.—(Power to arrange for management by local authorities of smallholdings and allotments provided by Minister or for the transfer thereof to such authorities.)

(1) Any smallholdings or allotments provided by the Minister and any land acquired by him for the purposes of smallholdings or allotments in exercise of the powers conferred on him by this Part of this Act may, by arrangement between him and the local authority, be either—

(a) controlled and managed by the authority as agents for the Minister; or
(b) transferred to the authority on such terms as may be agreed between the Minister and the authority and approved by the Treasury.

(2) Any smallholdings, allotments, or land transferred to a local authority under this section shall be deemed to have been acquired by the authority under the Smallholdings and Allotments Acts.

(3) In this section the expression "local authority" means, in relation to a smallholding or to land acquired for a smallholding, the council of the county, and, in relation to any allotment or to land acquired for allotments, the council of the borough, urban district, or parish or any county council acting in default of such a council as aforesaid.—[Dr. Addison.]

Brought up, and read the First time.

Dr. ADDISON: I beg to move, "That the Clause be read a Second time."
This Clause has been moved in fulfilment of an undertaking which I gave during the Committee stage. It takes the place of the original Clause 12 of the Bill.

Mr. GUINNESS: I beg to move, as an Amendment to the proposed Clause, in line 3, to leave out the word "may," and to insert instead thereof the words:
shall after not more than three years from their provision by the Minister.
The Minister has told us that this new Clause is in accordance with an undertaking given in Committee. I
would like to recognise the fact that the right hon. Gentleman has met us to some extent. In the original Bill there was a provision that the Minister could arrange for management by local authorities, but there was no power to hand over the smallholdings and allotment estates to the ownership of the authority now responsible for that class of administration. In Committee we were anxious to prevent the development of two rival systems. We quite understood that, given acceptance of the principle of the Bill—to which we do not in any way reduce our opposition—it was inevitable that a temporary measure of control should vest in the Ministry of Agriculture in the matter of training, of equipment and of maintenance allowance, and that until people were fairly settled on the holdings under this new and untried system obviously the Minister, being responsible for all this public money, must control the early stages of the experiment. But if we allow this Bill to enable the Ministry permanently to carry on the smallholdings and allotment estates inevitably that would snuff out all the efforts of the local authority, because this Bill is offering greater inducements and more favourable terms than were ever available previously.
We believe that the local authorities have an unrivalled and invaluable experience, in carrying on smallholdings especially, and also in the case of allotments. We believe that they have done their smallholdings work efficiently and cheaply, and we do not wish to see a competitive and more favoured system set up. To some extent the Minister has met us. He has taken powers to transfer to local authorities at his discretion, with the sanction of the Treasury. We want him to go further. We want him to follow the precedent of the Act of 1919. We cannot have the same machinery, because under that Act the provision of smallholdings was left to the local authorities, and the State by provisions which are inapplicable to our present problem, had to make up to the local authorities any temporary loss, and finally to come to a settlement after seven years. But we do feel that the general principle of that precedent should be followed, that we ought to continue the well-established system that
the smallholdings estates should be run by the responsible county authority. They have the land agents, they have the officials and the organisation, they are in touch with local conditions, and we wish to see the new system eventually absorbed in the very valuable work which has been carried on by the local authority.
The Amendment provides that after three years it shall no longer be optional to the Minister, but that he shall hand over these estates to the authorities—the county councils and the county borough councils, for smallholdings, and in the case of allotments, to the existing allotment authorities—so that when this scheme has been set on foot and has had a reasonable time for establishment the estate shall be run as part of the general effort of the local authorities.

Dr. ADDISON: I am sorry that I cannot possibly accept this Amendment. It would mean that at the end of three years, when smallholdings or allotments on an estate had been well-established, the Minister would be compelled to hand it over to the county council. I do not stand second to the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bury St. Edmunds (Mr. Guinness) in my appreciation of the work of the county councils. I recognise the value of their work, but I think it would be altogether unwise to compel the Minister, whether he likes it or not, and however well holdings might be working on any particular estate, to hand it over to somebody else at the end of three years. The new Clause shows that I recognise fully the desirability of co-operating with the local authorities as much as possible, but it would not be right to impose this requirement on the Minister and therefore I cannot accept it.

Sir JOSEPH LAMB: There are three Amendments to this new Clause on the Paper, all, to some extent, similar, and I wish to know, Sir Robert, if you propose to call that which stands in the name of the hon. Member for Cambridge (Sir D. Newton) and myself—in line 5, after the word "authority" to insert the words "and shall if the local authority so request." My position is that if I cannot have one Amendment I should like to have the other, and I wish to know whether I shall support the Amendment now before the Committee, or wait to move my own Amendment later.

The CHAIRMAN: I had not intended to call the hon. Member's Amendment, but I had intended to call the Amendment in the name of the hon. Member for Aldershot (Viscount Wolmer)—in line 4, after the word "authority" to insert the words:
and if the local authority at any time after the expiry of the period of five years subsequent to the date of such provision so requires, shall.

Sir J. LAMB: I submit, Sir Robert, that there is a difference between these Amendments.

The CHAIRMAN: I know. There are differences between Amendments in all these cases.

Sir J. LAMB: While regretting that my Amendment is not to be called, I should like to support the Amendment now before the Committee. I wish, first, to express my thanks to the Minister for the new Clause even as it is, and it is very largely, I think, because of questions raised in the Committee that this Clause has been proposed. The Minister has taken power to allot the management of these estates to the county councils, or to transfer the estates themselves, but he has used the word "may" and that leaves the Clause far too wide and too permissive for me. No time is specified, and while I cannot now discuss the Amendment which I have on the Paper, I think it would have been more suitably and would have allowed the Minister more elasticity as to time. Our object is to remove certain objections, and the first of these objections is that under this proposal there will be two authorities in the same area, administering holdings. There will be the county council, with the existing holdings, and then the Minister will be creating new holdings in the same area. The Bill gives greater facilities to those who apply for smallholdings under this Measure than it has been possible for the county councils to give to their tenants, and thus two tenants, perhaps side by side, may be working under different conditions not only as to occupancy but also as to finance and this may create a sense of ill-feeling and injustice as between the two.
The conditions under which the Minister can create holdings mean that the whole of the loss will be upon the Ministry, and, possibly, local authorities
will cease to create holdings at all in those circumstances. Under existing arrangements, local authorities only receive up to 75 per cent., and consequently 25 per cent. falls on the rates. At the present time, when there is such financial stringency, and such difficulty in keeping down rates, there will be a natural disinclination on the part, of local authorities to create holdings, when the Minister can create them without loss to the ratepayers. It is thus possible that the county councils will leave the onus of this duty to the Minister, and, in that case, all the officials at present in the counties for this purpose will remain, while another set of officials will be brought in to create and operate the new holdings. The local authorities now have their staffs of trained men, who are able to manage these holdings very much better than anybody who may be brought in without local knowledge of the area.
It has been said by the Minister that there are 27,521 smallholdings under the authority of the county councils, and land to the extent of approximately 500,000 acres, is under the control of those bodies. The officials in charge of those holdings know the varying conditions as between different districts and that is a great asset of which the Minister will deprive himself unless he utilises their services and hands over these holdings to them as early as possible. The Minister may create an estate on land adjoining an existing estate of smallholdings and thus there will be two different sets of holdings adjacent to each other. The men who are going on to these holdings will have a difficult task to make them pay. They will require all the assistance which they can get—both smallholders and allotment holders—and in the counties we now have the officials who are best qualified to give advice, and who know the local conditions. Those officials are already engaged in assisting local smallholders and allotment holders under education authorities and in connection with farming schools. What necessity is there to duplicate all these officials? I think we have a right to ask not only that this new Clause should be added to the Bill, but that there should be some definite statement as to the time when these allotments will be turned over to the local authorities.
The Minister may say that no reasonable Minister would do what has been suggested. On the other hand, Ministers come and Ministers go, particularly at the Ministry of Agriculture, and in my short experience of this House, I have had the pleasure of knowing several Ministers of Agriculture. I may say, without offence, that there is no guarantee that the present Minister is going to stay there very long, and the Minister who follows him may not be bound by any suggestions which he makes now or any obligation under which he personally may place himself. It is better to have these things in black and white. As I have said before, there is a great deal of nationalisation behind this Bill. Hon. Members opposite are, of course, entitled to their views, and I hope I am entitled to mine. It may be that there is no intention to turn these holdings over to the county councils at all, but instead to make them into one large estate under the Ministry with the idea, ultimately, of controlling the whole of the land of the country. I do not think we ought to run that, risk. Our experience in the past has been that the Ministry, when they have had holdings, as under the Smallholding Colonies Act have retained them too long, and that if those holdings had been turned over to the counties sooner, con-

siderable losses would have been avoided. I hope the Minister will accept at least one of these Amendments.

Sir B. PETO: There is one question I want to ask. The Minister spoke of the "possible development of this policy." Does that indicate that it is the ultimate policy of the Minister of Agriculture to take over the whole of the smallholdings in the country or not? It has been pointed out that it is, obviously, undesirable to have two sets of smallholdings under two financial conditions running side by side at the same time. Is the Minister going to refuse to hand back the smallholdings to the administration of the county councils? I ask him to let the Committee know before we go to a Division what was meant by the phrase "possible development of this policy." Does that mean that it is the definite purpose of the Bill to do away with smallholdings under the county councils altogether, and to absorb them in one great department administered by a Department of State? That leads me to another obvious question, which is whether the development of this policy means ultimate nationalisation?

Question put, "That the word 'may' stand part of the proposed Clause."

The Committee divided: Ayes, 252; Noes, 123.

Division No. 143.]
AYES.
[9.27 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Burgess, F. G.
Glbbins, Joseph


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Buxton, c. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Gibson, H. M. (Lanes, Mossley)


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Calne, Derwent Hall.
Gill, T. H.


Aitchison, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Cameron, A. G.
Gossling, A. G.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Cape, Thomas
Gould, F.


Angell, Sir Norman
Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)


Arnott, John
Charleton, H. C.
Graham, Rt. Hon.Wm. (Edin.,Cent.)


Aske, Sir Robert
Clarke, J. S.
Granville, E.


Attlee, Clement Richard
Cluse, W. S.
Gray, Milner


Ayles, Walter
Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne)


Baker, John (Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Compton, Joseph
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Cove, William G.
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)


Barnes, Alfred John
Cripps, Sir Stafford
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)


Batey, Joseph
Daggar, George
Groves, Thomas E.


Bellamy, Albert
Dallas, George
Grundy, Thomas W.


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)


Benson, G.
Day, Harry
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)


Blindell, James
Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Dukes, C.
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)


Bowen, J. W.
Ede, James Chuter
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Edmunds, J. E.
Hardle, George D.


Broad, Francis Alfred
Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Harris, Percy A.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon


Bromfield, William
Egan, W. H.
Hastings, Dr. Somerville


Bromley, J.
Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer)
Haycock, A. W.


Brooke, W.
Foot, Isaac
Hayday, Arthur


Brothers, M.
Forgan, Dr. Robert
Hayes, John Henry


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Freeman, Peter
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Henderson, Arthur, Junr. (Cardiff, S.)


Buchanan, G.
George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)


Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Melville, Sir James
Shinwell, E.


Herriotts, J.
Middleton, G.
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Hirst, G. H. (York W. R. Wentworth)
Milner, Major J.
Simmons, C. J.


Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Montague, Frederick
Simon, Rt. Hon. Sir John


Hoffman, P. C.
Morgan, Dr. H. B.
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Hopkin, Daniel
Morley, Ralph
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Horo-Belisha, Leslie
Morris, Rhys Hopkins
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Horrabin, J. F.
Morris-Jones, Dr. J. H. (Denbigh)
Smith, H. B. Lees. (Keighley)


Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Mort, D. L.
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Mosley, Lady C. (Stoke-on-Trent)
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Jenkins, Sir William
Muff, G.
Smith, W. R. (Norwich)


John, William (Rhondda, West)
Muggeridge, H. T.
Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip


Jones, F. Liewellyn,(Flint)
Murnin, Hugn
Sorensen, R.


Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)
Stamford, Thomas W.


Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Oldfield, J. R.
Stephen, Campbell


Jones, Morgan (Caerphilly)
Oliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)
Stewart, J. (St. Rollox)


Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)
Strachey, E. J. St. Loe


Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)
Strauss, G. R.


Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Palin, John Henry
Sullivan, J.


Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Paling, Wilfrid
Sutton, J. E.


Kinley, J.
Palmer, E. T.
Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)


Kirkwood, D.
Perry, S. F.
Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)


Lang, Gordon
Peters, Dr. Sidney John
Tinker, John Joseph


Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.
Toole, Joseph


Lathan, G.
Picton-Turbervill, Edith
Tout, W. J.


Law, Albert (Bolton)
Pole, Major D. G.
Townend, A. E.


Law, A. (Rossendale)
Potts, John S.
Vaughan, David


Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Price, M. P.
Viant, S. P.


Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Pybus, Percy John
Walkden, A. G.


Leach, W.
Quibell, D. J. K.
Walker, J.


Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson
Wallace, H. W.


Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Rathbone, Eleanor
Watkins, F. C.


Lees, J.
Raynes, W. R.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)


Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Richards, R.
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)


Longbottom, A. W.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)
Wellock, Wilfred


Longden, F.
Riley, Ben (Dewsbury)
Welsh, James (Paisley)


Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Riley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)


MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Ritson, J.
West, F. R.


McEntee, V. L.
Romeril, H. G.
Westwood, Joseph


McKinlay, A.
Rosbotham, D. S. T.
White, H. G.


Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Rowson, Guy
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Salter, Dr. Alfred
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


MacNeill-Weir, L.
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


McShane, John James
Sanders, W. S.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)
Sawyer, G. F.
Wilson, C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Mander, Geoffrey le M.
Scott, James
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Mansfield, W.
Scrymgeour, E.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Marcus, M.
Scurr, John
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester,Loughb'gh)


Markham, S. F.
Sexton, Sir James
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Marley, J.
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)



Marshall, Fred
Sherwood, G. H.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Mathers, George
Shield, George William
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr. Thurtle.


Matters, L. W.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond



Maxton, James
Shillaker, J. F.



NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Courtauld, Major J. S.
Hammersley, S. S.


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Hanbury, C.


Albery, Irving James
Crlchton-Stuart, Lord C.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry


Ashley, Lt.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Crookshank, Cpt.H.(Llndsey,Galnsbro)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnea)


Atkinson, C.
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Haslam, Henry C.


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Dalkeith, Earl of
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur P.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Hennessy, Major Sir G. R. J.


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Davies, Maj. Geo. F. (Somerset, Yeovil)
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Dawson, Sir Philip
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M.(Hackney, N.)


Boothby, R. J. G.
Dixey, A. C.
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vansittart
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Kindersley, Major G. M.


Bracken, B.
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Lamb, Sir J.Q.


Braithwalte, Major A. N.
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, High Peak)


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Newb'y)
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Weston-S. M.)
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)


Buchan-Hopburn, P. G. T.
Ferguson, Sir John
Llewellin, Major J. J.


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Fielden, E. B.
Long, Major Hon. Eric


Campbell, E. T.
Ford, Sir P. J.
McConnell, Sir Joseph


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.


Chamberlain,Rt. Hn.Sir J. A.(Birm.,W.)
Galbraith. J. F. W.
Merrlman, Sir F. Boyd


Chapman, Sir S.
Gibson, C. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Christie, J. A.
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Monsell, Eyres, Com. Rt. Hon. Sir B.


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Muirhead, A. J.


Colville, Major D. J.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)




O'Connor, T. J.
Shepperson, sir Ernest Whittome
Train, J.


Ormsby-Gore, Rt. Hon. William
Simms, Major-General J.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement


Penny, Sir George
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Belfat)
Ward, Lieut. Col. Sir A. Lambert


Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)
Skelton, A. N.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles


Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)
Wayland, sir William A.


Ramsbotham, H.
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Klnc'dine, C.)
Wells, Sydney R.


Rawson, Sir Cooper
Smithers, Waldron
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)


Reid, David D. (County Down)
Somerset, Thomas
Windsor-Cilve, Lieut.-Colonel George


Remer, John R.
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)
Withers, Sir John James


Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.
Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Womersley, W. J.


Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)
Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Salmon, Major I.
Thomson, Sir F.



Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)
Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
TELLERS FOR THE NOES—


Savery, S. S.
Todd, Capt. A. J.
Captain Sir George Bowyer and Sir Victor Warrender.


Motion made, and Question, "That the Clause be added to the Bill," put, and agreed to.

Bill reported; as amended, on recommittal, considered,

The SECRETARY of STATE for SCOTLAND (Mr. William Adamson): I beg to move, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

Lieut.-Colonel HENEAGE: On a point of Order. I would like to draw attention to the fact that only one hour and twenty minutes is left for the Third Reading, and, as a great many Members wish to speak, that is a very short time in which to discuss a Bill which has been very much altered in Committee and on the Report stage. I suggest that the Government should give more time.

Mr. SPEAKER: There is no point of Order, and it has nothing to do with me.

Mr. ADAMSON: This Measure is designed to secure the better utilisation of the land of this country, and I would remind the House that it deals with matters of fundamental importance to our agricultural system. The House could deal with no more important and urgent matter, so far as agriculture is concerned, than this Bill. If we can deal successfully with the land problem, it will considerably affect, directly and indirectly, our unemployment statistics. We will restore various parts of the country areas which are becoming derelict, and we will affect directly and indirectly the balance of trade and secure greater economic independence for our country.
The first part of the Bill deals with what is called large-scale or mechanised farms. For many years, various authorities have urged that an experiment of this kind should be made. There has been, for example, the Selborne Committee, which reported unanimously in favour of this experiment, and I would
remind hon. Members on the other side of the House that at least three Ministers were on the Committee. Then Professor Orwin, who has been frequently quoted in these Debates as a strong supporter of this proposal, has brought all his knowledge of agriculture to bear in giving an opinion in favour of large-scale farms. We have the results of some experience in various parts of the world, and, while I am not going so far as to say that large-scale or mechanised farming has been successful in every instance, yet this much can be said, that it has the promise of putting certain phases of our agriculture on a better economic foundation. I would emphasise, before I pass on to deal with my next point, that though it is only an experiment, yet it is an experiment which it is well worth undertaking by the people of this country. Then we come to that phase of the Bill which deals with our under-drained and undernourished land, land which requires reconditioning. The land may be in a soured or ill-drained condition for many reasons. The proprietors may be financially unable to keep their property in an up-to-date state or they may be unwilling to do so, but in the national interest it is imperative that our great national asset should be kept in good condition.
Thirdly, we come to the question of demonstration areas. Here, in my opinion, lie the most immediate and most obvious hopes in the Bill for agriculturists. We have been making experiments, though not sufficient experiments, with a view to avoiding waste and destroying pests and trying to obtain better products, but, alas, very frequently the discoveries of our laboratories and our colleges take time to filter through to our farmers and smallholders, and the great value of the provisions for setting up demonstration areas is that they will be there ready for the farmer and the smallholder to
see for themselves what can be done. Fourthly, we have the question of smallholders. For many years past it has been the considered policy of Government after Government to assist in the provision of smallholdings. This policy of sub-dividing large estates and large farms has been adopted by nearly every civilised country in the world. A century ago in this country the position was the other way about, but now we, with every other civilised country, are convinced of the urgent necessity of maintaining a healthy and contented rural peasantry. It is the smallholder in Denmark who has captured our butter and bacon trade, and it is the smallholder of France and of Spain who floods our markets with early potatoes. Hence the value of this section of the Measure, which will enable us to put smallholders on the land. It will give us the power of putting the unemployed man or the farmworker on the land as a smallholder and giving him a maintenance grant up to £50 a year for the first year until he begins to get some return from his labours.
I estimate that in Scotland we shall be able to make provisions for at least 700 families under this section, and, obviously, if that can be continued for a decade, we shall be able to increase the number to 7,000 families, and in the course of a lifetime we should change the conditions of the countryside. Fifthly I come to the question of allotments. Here is one of the things which is provided for in this Bill to which every one of us has rendered lip service; but this Government has provided the money, and the finding of the money is the acid test of our interest in the development of smallholdings. We propose to give unemployed men, through local authorities, of course, allotment holdings up to one acre in extent, and we propose to supply the money for seeds and implements. We also propose to meet the approved expenses of local authorities who engage in the provision of these allotments.
Taken as a whole, I may fairly claim that this Bill deals in a broad and comprehensive way with the major problems of the soil so far as its productive capacity is concerned. I do not urge that this Measure, taken by itself, will be able to solve all the problems of agriculture, but taken in conjunction with our Marketing Bill, our Smallholders and Agricultural Holdings Bill, our Livestock Licens-
ing Bill, with the great scientific experiments such as the milk investigation in Lanarkshire which we are conducting and the development of the grading and marking of beef, and taken in conjunction with other Measures which the Government has already declared its intention to promote, I think we can fairly claim that we are doing everything—

Mr. CAMPBELL: Everybody!

Mr. ADAMSON: —to give this greatest industry and those who work on the soil the opportunity of earning a decent and economic livelihood. I am proud to have been associated with this great effort, greater, I may add, than is being made by any Government in the world to-day to place agriculture on a sound and efficient basis.

Captain CROOKSHANK: I rise to move the rejection of the Bill. I have not been carried away by the right hon. Gentleman's claim that he was supporting a Measure before the House dealing with "the major problems of the soil". I do not agree with the right hon. Gentleman's statement that the Bill would affect the balance of our trade. I shall oppose the Measure. I will not move, "That the Bill be read the Third time upon this day six months," because it is so bad that we do not desire to see it again. We have had long Debates on the Measure, we have had the kangaroo closure in. Committee and an all-night sitting, and, as I have listened to those Debates, I have been reminded of the old question that used to be in dispute among philosophers as to whether it is the hen or the egg which comes first.
All parties should be concerned to try to place agriculture upon a better footing and make an endeavour to secure a more prosperous future for the industry. Right hon. and hon. Gentlemen opposite, and those sitting on the Liberal benches seem to take the view that all you have to do in order to bring back prosperity to agriculture is to alter the tenure of land and the system of marketing. Those sitting on this side of the House believe that it can only be done by concentrating efforts on a solution of the problem of prices and seeing what can be done to make agriculture profitable to those on the land, who at the present time are scarcely able to secure an existence at all. That is the fundamental
difference between the two sides of the House, and that difference is fully borne out by the agricultural measures which we have been discussing this week.
Let me remind the House what it is that this Measure proposes. It proposes to set up demonstration farms. That experiment has no bearing whatever on the problem of how to make both ends meet with which the farmers are faced. For whose benefit has this Bill been framed? It is not for the benefit of smallholders or allotment holders. As a matter of fact, it is no use to them to have demonstration farms. This Measure is of no particular advantage to existing holders of land who are farming on a large scale. The fact remains in spite of the Prime Minister's strictures that the people on the land know more about their business than anything that can be taught them by right hon. Gentleman and hon. Gentlemen opposite.
10.0 p.m.
With regard to smallholders, it is agreed that there is some advantage in developing that movement. The Minister of Agriculture has told us that this Measure will settle 700 families per annum on the land. That statement shows how useless this Measure will be as a relief to unemployment. When we come to the question of allotments, many of us cannot help thinking that, good as the movement is, and desirous as we are of helping, the Government cannot base their Measure on the success of an experiment carried out under special circumstances in South Wales. What applies there does not apply equally well in other parts of the country. The Minister of Agriculture always seems to me to be in doubt as to whether he is the Minister of Agriculture or whether he is, as in former days, following the medical profession. He seems to say to the agricultural industry, "You are very sick, take this pill, and it will do you good." In my view, the agricultural industry requires a strong chest protector against the foreign winds that come across the seas. Instead of giving us protection of that kind, the right hon. Gentleman prescribes a red pill labelled "nationalisation."
You cannot find anyone in an agricultural constituency who wants this Measure. The only people who appear to
want it are the theorists who sit on the benches opposite. We on this side object to the Measure, first of all, because it is hopelessly bureaucratic, and will promote a great increase in the number of Government officials. That is inherent in the development of a Socialist policy and we expect it from them; but we are sorry to see them supported in this by the Liberal party who ought to know better than to desert their former policy of being unbending supporters of individuality and freedom. What are the Liberals playing at in regard to this Measure? Our first objection to the Bill is to the bureaucratic methods which are bound to follow from all Measures of this kind.
Our second objection is that the Minister of Agriculture is well known as the champion spender, and in this policy he is being aided and abetted by the Leader of the Liberal party, the right hon. Gentleman for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George) who has already told us that
there is a great deal of money to he spent which the Treasury will not see again.
The Financial Secretary to the Treasury told us this afternoon that he did not expect that the "expenditure under this Bill would be entirely remunerative." Our trouble is that it is going to be frightfully expensive in the opposite direction. The Minister of Agriculture said that he expected to get a great deal from the Treasury and that he was sorry that he did not ask for more. I do not think the present Chancellor of the Exchequer while he is in office will allow the Minister of Agriculture to run away with too much of his cash. We have been told by the Minister that anybody who can make 3 per cent. interest on money invested in land will be doing very well, and that the State will do very well if it can get a similar return.
Another point to which attention must be directed is the powers that are to be found in Clause 3 of the Bill. This point will be dealt with more adequately by other speakers, but we must remember that the Minister is taking powers which it is an outrage to confer upon any Department. The primary object of this Measure seems to wobble between the relief of unemployment and land settlement. At the present time, it does not
incline much in either direction. We find that the number of unemployed at the present time is 2,624,000, and that total is increasing at the rate of 30,000 per week. There is nothing in this Bill commensurate with the problem with which the Government is faced. It is a bad Bill. It cannot help agriculture. It cannot help the agricultural worker. It certainly cannot help the farmer, and it cannot make farming pay. It is undoubtedly going to threw a great burden on the taxpayer, and hurry on the national bankruptcy to which we are rapidly heading under the present Government. It is the worst of all forms of legislation, because it is a hybrid between the Liberal party plan and the Socialist party plan. It is a Measure fathered by the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George), brought into the World by the professional skill of the right hon. Gentleman the Minister for Agriculture—who, after all, as a one-time Liberal himself, can recognise its parentage—and nurtured through all its stages by the Government maid-of-all-work, the Under-Secretary of State for Scotland, who applied the necessary ginger from the Socialist side. It is a bad Bill, and when you, Sir, put the Question, those of us who sit on these benches will shout "No" with the utmost conviction, and will go into the Lobby perfectly certain that we are doing the right thing.

Miss LLOYD GEORGE: I do not think there has ever been any doubt as to the attitude which the Liberal party will take on this Bill. We support a good thing when we get the chance. We have given it every facility that it was in our power to give at every stage, and those of us who were on the Committee upstairs imposed upon ourselves a self-denying ordinance so that the passage of this Bill might not be delayed through any fault of our own. But we welcome the Bill principally because it is a Measure to relieve unemployment and to regenerate the countryside, or, perhaps I should say, a Measure which can relieve unemployment. We do not attach quite the same importance to Clause 1 of the Bill as bon. Members above the Gangway appear to do. We have had a great deal of discussion on that Clause, and we are still rather puzzled as to what its purpose is. The demonstration farms are to extend and
supplement the work done by the local authorities, the universities, and the agricultural colleges in the way of experiments, testing out new machinery, and popularising modern methods of farming. Then, in the next stage of the Bill, we get a provision which deals with drainage and reclamation, and, if all these purposes are to be achieved in Clauses 2 and 3.
We are a little puzzled as to what is the purpose of Clause 1, but it certainly has this advantage for hon. Members above the Gangway. Those of them who see dispossessed Kulaks in every corner, and the hand of Stalin in every Clause of the Bill, can represent it. as being nothing less than the beginning of the Russian system of farming in this country, but I think we can rest assured that Stalin would disdain an experiment on this scale. But it has an advantage also for hon. Members opposite. They can claim it as another stage in their slow but sure progress towards the Socialist state. They can say that it is not so much an experiment in large-scale farming as an experiment in small-scale Socialism. We feel about it that "if it'll doe nae quid it'll doe nae hairm." We are not so enthusiastic about this particular Clause, but we feel that its disadvantages are outweighed by the second part of the Bill.
The main and the primary purpose of this Bill is we think, the regeneration of the countryside. Hon. Members on these benches have consistently and persistently advocated a "back to the land" policy since the days before the War, and the need for it was not quite so urgent then as it is to-day. I think it is admitted on all hands that the case for such a movement has never been so forcible as it is to-day, when we have 90 per cent. of our population crowded into the towns, under 7 per cent. scattered in the countryside, and 2,500,000 out of work. Many of these men will never be restored to their old industries, and it is essential to provide a new outlet for their labour. Everyone says that they are agreed on the principle of land settlement, but when it comes to apply those principles, there is not the same unanimity. The right hon. Gentleman the leader of the Opposition said, in a pronouncement which he made some time ago:
I regard it as vital that the great basic industry of agriculture should not merely be preserved, but restored to a more prosperous condition as an essential balancing element in the economic and social life of the country.
That cannot be done while the population is distributed as it is to-day, and it is equally certain that you cannot restore the equilibrium unless you transfer a great deal of the weight from one scale to the other. But there is a sort of defeatist attitude about land settlement on the benches above the Gangway. Hon. Members above the Gangway are full of gloomy prophecies and fore-bodings. There is a sort of idea that you cannot make the urban worker into an agriculturist unless he be born again, except of course in the Dominions. There the impossible becomes the possible, and even the miner, if he be in Saskatchewan or Assiniboia, will, somehow or other, adapt himself to a country life. But it is a very different proposition to settle miners on the British countryside. You may send them to training centres, you may give them every facility, but, somehow or other, it is going to be almost impossible for them to adapt themselves to a country life. And yet it is a very curious thing that the history of the past few years has shown us how fatally easy it is for an agricultural labourer, without any training whatsoever, to adapt himself to an urban occupation.
Hon. Members above the Gangway say that there will be failures. Of course, there will be failures. The hon. Member who has just sat down said that my right hon. Friend the Member for Carnarvon Boroughs (Mr. Lloyd George said that some of this money would never be seen again by the Treasury. I do not defend the right hon. Gentleman—[HON. MEMBERS: "Hear, hear!"]—I think he is quite capable of doing that himself. But I would say that in this case, as, I think, in many other cases, he is facing realities. Of course, there will be failures. You can never effect a material change in the balance of population unless you are prepared to face risks, and also to face a certain amount of loss.
At the same time, we had one very serious objection to the Bill as it was originally drafted, and that was that the
agricultural labourer was excluded from the benefits that were to be given to others. The people who know about the land were to be excluded, and the people who know less or nothing about the land were to be given special facilities to settled in the countryside. We believe that that discrimination, if it had been made, would have given rise to a very great sense of injustice among the agricultural workers in the country.
Everyone is glad that the unemployed, who have been through hard and bitter times, should have this opportunity of reinstatement and a fresh chance in life; but it would have been neither equitable nor just to do it at the expense of the lowest paid worker in industry. It would have been a case of robbing Peter to pay Paul. We are not told whether it created any ill feeling between them, but there are not many of us in the apostolic succession, and I feel quite sure that this would have created a deep and abiding resentment between the unemployed man and woman and the agricultural worker, which we think would have been justified. Many of these labourers have, after all, been anxious and eager to get a smallholding for years, and they have not had the capital to enable them to do so. It is not reasonable to expect that an agricultural labourer can save enough out of 31s. a week to secure a holding, to equip it, and to maintain it for that first year which, after all, is the trial year. However frugal, however self-denying they may be, it is impossible for them to do so. Under this Bill they would have been passed over, and all that financial assistance and all the benefits which they have been awaiting would have been given to others.
We are very glad that the Committee upstairs and this House have accepted, without Division, the Clause which brings the agricultural labourer into this Bill I know that the right hon. Gentleman had grave misgivings about it at one time. He had many fears. We think that they were exaggerated. He warned us that he might find it necessary to hedge the Clause round with safeguards. I believe that, if the feeling in the Committee upstairs had been reciprocated in this House, those safeguards would have been blown sky high, and I am glad that the right hon. Gentleman
has, instead, decided to throw them to the winds himself. I think it is good that this, the first measure of justice that has been given to the agricultural labourer should not be given as a half measure with a grudge, but as a whole measure with a good grace. The right hon. Gentleman said in the Committee upstairs that he did not want to be a party to offering to men something that he could not supply. I do hope that he is not going to be guided in this matter by the principle of
Many are called, but few are chosen.
Even if the whole of the 2,500,000 work-less, and the 200,000 agricultural workers—which was the figure that the right hon. Gentleman quoted—were settled on the land, the percentage of our population on the land would still be less than it is in Belgium. I hope very much that he will make his calculations on a broad basis.
We believe this new Clause is justified from an unemployment point of view After all, for half-a-century we have had the workers moving from the countryside into the towns, simply because there is no inducement to them to remain on the land. We think this Bill in its original form would have done nothing to check that migration; indeed, it might have encouraged it, because it would have been, perhaps, the only chance the agricultural labourers would have had of securing holdings. It would at least have made them eligible for a holding. It may be said that by this Bill you are denuding the countryside of the ordinary agricultural worker. I know of no policy that could be devised that would do that more effectively than the policy which we have been pursuing for the past few years, a policy which has decimated many villages in many parts of the country as effectively as any plague could possibly have done. It may be argued that this has a very negligible effect on the actual figures of unemployment, yet, when you compare two figures which I should like to give the House, it has a very great significance. The first is that, during the peak period, 12,000 labourers on an average have left the land every year. The second is that in very nearly two years the Government have only succeeded in providing work for 86,000 men, and yet in those two years 24,000 labourers have left the land.
There is one fact which the Ministry's returns show which is more ominous than any other. It is that in the last nine years the regular male workers on the land under 21 have declined by 23 per cent. I think the House will agree that that figure proves more accurately than. any argument could do that the young men will not be satisfied with a career which starts and ends, as far as they can see, with a wage of 31s. So in ever-increasing numbers they make their effective protest by going to seek at least a better fortune in the towns, and, whether they are successful in obtaining work or not, either way they make longer the queue outside the Employment Exchange. We think it is worth a good deal to give these men an inducement to stay on the land.
We on these benches congratulate the Minister on his courage in bringing forward this Bill. Whether it will be an effective Measure to deal with unemployment depends upon him and, to a greater extent, upon the Chancellor of the Exchequer. He is master of all the forms of intimidation that are known. As far as I can see, the Trade Disputes Act of 1927 has not affected his form very much. We hope there will be no peaceful picketing of the right hon. Gentleman at the doors of the Treasury. We believe it is a good machine, but we hope that it will not he kept in the garage, that it will not he merely for the show room to show what the Labour Government can do, but that it will be used to carry large numbers of these rather weary and disillusioned travellers to a more hopeful destination.

Lieut.-Colonel WINDSOR-CLIVE: We have every cause to complain of the manner in which the Government have dealt with this Bill. After entrusting the Chairman of the Committee upstairs with the power of the Kangaroo Closure, they ought to have given ample time for a discussion of this Bill on the Report stage. It is obvious that they have not done so, because here we are with only one hour and 20 minutes left for the Third Reading of the Bill. We have had to press two days' work into one, and have an all-night sitting as well. During that all-night sitting I do not think that the Minister's handling of the Bill was good. He might have shortened our proceedings during the
night very considerably if he had accepted at once a certain Amendment. for which he allowed the House two hours' discussion. Also, during last Wednesday night, there might have been a good deal less talk if we had had more assistance from the Law Officers of the Crown. We are delighted to see the learned Attorney-General make one of his rare visits to the Treasury Bench during the course of this Bill. I am afraid that not even the eloquent speech of the Secretary of State for Scotland can bring good into this Bill, although if there was anything good in it the delightful speech of the hon. Lady the Member for Anglesey (Miss Lloyd George) would have done it.
I object to this Bill primarily because it involves such a very large expenditure which we cannot afford and which gives, as far as I can see, no corresponding benefit to agriculture. Surely, it ought to be an accepted principle that there should be no increase in national expenditure except what is essential to give assistance to productive industry. This Bill certainly does not perform that function. It does nothing whatever to make farming pay. I believe the provision for large-scale farming to be entirely unnecessary in this country. The only certain result which we know will come from it will be that there will be a reduction in the number of men employed on the land. The Debate on the Amendment to omit the word "let" in Clause 1 (2, c) showed very clearly that by this Bill there is being established machinery which can lead to nationalisation. The hon. Member for Anglesey rather taunted us with the bogey of Stalin. We cannot get Stalin all at once. Is this not the first step in that direction?
Under Clauses 2 and 3 there is provision for the expenditure of £5,700,000. I make no apology for repeating what has been said before on this Bill. I do not see the use of expending all this money to recondition land which cannot properly be cultivated when you have done it. If the Government would take steps to fulfil their own pledge to make farming pay, it would not be necessary to spend so much public money on reconditioning the land. With regard to smallholders, the hon. Lady said that we were defeatists
and pessimists in regard to the subject. If we look at the plight of so many of these people who have spent many years upon the land, we have some justification for being rather pessimistic about it at present. She said that we only applauded smallholdings in the Dominions, but, at any rate, the Dominions see to it that their producers are not exposed to the full blast of foreign competition. This Bill does nothing whatever to make farming pay. That being so, I oppose it on the ground that it is a very gross waste of public money.

Mr. GUINNESS: At this late hour and with so short a time available for the Third Reading Debate it is impossible to attempt to deal with the vicious proposals in this Bill. I wish to devote the few moments at my disposal to a protest against the methods which the Government have used to drive the Bill through the House of Commons. We all know that the origin of this Bill was not in any way agricultural. It was purely political. We politicians are sometimes said to be rather self-centred, but no one, however satisfied he may be with his political convictions, on the other side of the House can be under any delusions that this Bill has got any agricultural opinion behind it. It is criticised by the overwhelming mass of those who live by the land. But the opposition of the agricultural industry has only stimulated the Government in their determination to force the Bill through and to defeat any attempt at argument by means of the Kangaroo and the Closure. This Government, who are always bemoaning their fate as a minority Government, have denied the liberty of Debate in a way that has never been attempted before. [HON. MEMBERS: "You had all night!"] I will come to the all night sitting. That was not free discussion. That was a way of preventing public knowledge of what is proposed in this Bill.
There has been no free discussion. There has been very little public ventilation of the dangers involved to the agricultural industry by the proposals in the Bill. We are accustomed to the Kangaroo procedure on the Floor of the House, but in connection with this Bill it has been applied under unprecedented conditions upstairs. After curtailment of debate in Committee upstairs, we naturally expected that there would at least be a normal opportunity of discuss-
ing the Bill on the Floor of the House, but the Government, after the extraordinary procedure upstairs, demanded that a Bill which had taken 12 days in Committee should be given only three days for the remaining stages on the Floor of the House. It was impossible, even with the utmost efforts to avoid any kind of unnecessary debate, to compress the discussion into so short a period. We finally got four days. How did the Government compress the Debate into this very short period? They forced us to sit for nine hours after the normal time for the rising of the House—more than equivalent to a full Parliamentary day.
The Minister of Agriculture has got, as we all know, a very disarming manner, but if you cover the tyres of a steam roller with velvet you do not in any way prevent its crushing effect. His method has been absolutely to stifle discussion. He gave away his methods in the early hours of the morning, when we sat up all night. He told us that Clauses 1, 2 and 3 were the most important part of the Bill. He secured that important part of the Bill, or a very great part of it, at a time when there could be no adequate Press report, and when the House was in no physical condition to give proper consideration to it. We were considering Clause (1) from 11 o'clock till 2; Clause (2) from 2 a.m. to 4 a.m.; and Clause (3) from 4 a.m. to 8 a.m. And we are to have two Government speeches on the Third Reading Debate, which is to last one hour and 20 minutes. I do not remember any Government Bill being supported on Third Reading by two Government speeches. The history of this Bill in this House will, I hope, be realised when it reaches another place—[Interruption.] I am glad to be able to stress the stifling of Parliamentary Debate by the methods adopted in connection with this Bill for the information of both agriculturists in the country and the other place, so that they may realise that the Government has arbitrarily refused the normal right of the House of Commons to deliberate this Measure, and may give it their special consideration.
The Bill retains all its original blemishes. Part I is absolutely useless for the object proposed, the assistance of agriculture. Where experiment can be usefully applied it has already
been carried out, and there is no case for this large experiment, this large expenditure on what is called large scale farming; and in any case a tenth part of the £1,000,000 proposed would be ample to test Professor Orwin's theories. The way to get land reconditioned is to make it pay, not to pour out public money regardless of an economic return. The provision for reconditioning land has never received any detailed examination on the Floor of the House. We were only able under the Kangaroo to propose to leave out the whole sub-section, but the most dangerous innovation is to lay it down that all this money can be spent, without any economic justification, but merely if in the opinion of the Minister reconditioning and drainage is necessary to enable the land to be used satisfactorily. The only possible way of testing whether public money should be poured out to improve the condition of the land is to gauge the return which can be expected, and it is an absolutely damning condition of this Bill that this money can be poured out, not in order to get any economic return but simply because the Minister is of the opinion that poor land can be improved.
The Minister of Agriculture is vindicating his well-earned and well-established reputation as a financial megalomaniac. He scorns to deal with any financial unit less than £1,000,000. In the first part of the Bill he goes in for round numbers, such as £6,000,000. Of course the 11/80ths condition about Scotland will compel him to descend to a fraction of a million. We believe that all this money is going to be wasted, that there is no justification for this uneconomic expenditure on large-scale experiments and reconditioning of land in these very difficult financial times. I do not think it has been adequately realised outside Parliament that the £6,700,000 under Part I of the Bill is a mere fleabite of the unlimited expenditure which can be incurred under Part II. We have never succeeded in getting from the Minister any information as to the amount which he is going to spend or the rate at which he proposes to carry out his powers.
To-night we have been told, in a very effective speech from below the Gangway, that the Liberal party, though they do not altogether like Part I, look on
Part II as a very good thing. The Government have been given very strong support by the Guardian Angel who is speaking on behalf of a party which is the real author of this Bill. We can assume that the warmth and shelter of those wings are being held over the Government only because the Government are going to carry out the programme of the Liberal party. We had figures given in the Liberal programme of 100,000 and even 200,000 families to be settled on the land. Under this Bill every thousand families so settled will cost at least £1,000,000. So if we are to have 200,000 families settled it means an expenditure of £200,000,000.
We were told by the Financial Secretary to-day—to summarise a rather complicated financial statement—that for every £20,000,000 expended the taxpayer would have to face an annual expenditure for 20 years of £1,000,000. So if we are to spend money to re-establish on the land 200,000 families, we shall have for 20 years at the peak period an annual expenditure of no less than £10,000,000, borne upon the Vote for Part II of the Bill alone. We believe that there is nothing in the Bill to help the agriculturist in his present difficulty. There is very little left in the Bill after the acceptance of the Amendment of the hon. Lady the Member for Anglesea (Miss Lloyd George) to provide any assistance in the matter of unemployment, because quite properly, after that Amendment, the first consideration must be given to those who live on the land. At a moment when public opinion demands that there should be a decrease in our present expenditure in order to give our industries a chance of re-establishing themselves, this Bill would throw on us a burden of huge and growing financial commitments. It is an interesting first-fruit of the Liberal and Socialist delusion that our agricultural and industrial depression can he cured by borrowing money and spending it on uneconomic purposes.

Dr. ADDISON: Before I come to the more controversial portions of the right hon. Gentleman's speech I will, in accordance with my promise, make a short statement to the House with respect to the progress of the allotments part of this scheme. I may say in response to the Noble Lord the Member for Aldershot
(Viscount Wolmer) that I have made inquiries and I find that we have every reason to adhere to our original anticipation of providing material for 100,000 allotments. It is still early in the day to deal with these matters and many authorities have not yet completed their purchases, but, generally speaking, and by the help of all parties, I must say we are receiving the promptest assistance. As a matter of fact, as showing how mistaken some of my Scottish colleagues would have been had they carried that Amendment which would have limited expenditure in Scotland to eleven-eightieths, my information is that Sir William Waterlow to-night accompanied by one of the officers of the Department is on his way to Scotland to buy 1,000 tons of seed potatoes. May I, at his request, make an appeal to Members in every part of the House—because I recognise that Members on all sides are supporting the allotments part of the scheme—that in any districts where the authorities are not yet active in this matter, Members will do their best to stir up those authorities, and will tell those authorities to get into association with our Allotments Committee.
With regard to the progress of smallholdings, I do not commit myself to the kind of figures which the right hon. Gentleman the Member for Bury St. Edmunds. (Mr. Guinness) mentioned. First may I say that the whole House will agree with me in paying a tribute to the hon. Lady the Member for Anglesey (Miss Lloyd George) who presented her case with such singular felicity. I think I may say that we recognised some sparks from an old and rather familiar anvil. Whilst as I say I cannot follow the right hon. Gentleman in his predictions I would take upon myself the responsibility of saying, at this last moment, that I recognise that, in providing a large number of smallholdings, you are embarking upon an enterprise which necessarily requires time for fulfilment and I sincerely hope, whatever may happen hereafter, that this great project will not be interrupted. We propose, so far as we can to start it upon lines which everyone will recognise as sound, and which we hope will be continued, but, with the best will in the world, it takes time first to select your applicants and then to obtain the land—much of the land in this country being only vacated at Michaelmas and Lady
Day—and when you have obtained possession of the land, to subdivide it and build houses and so forth. I wish the House to recognise that we are fully conversant with these realities and we know that they will take time, but the fact that they exist only means that we must tackle them with courage and with vision beforehand.
As far as we are concerned, while recognising the physical limitations in the early days, we intend to do our very best to give full effect to the intention of Parliament in this matter. I am quite sure that if in the early months or years we can develop a system which is sound in its working and in its machinery as regards equipment, land, the provision of staffs and capital, we shall have started an organisation which not even a hostile Government will dare to bring to a standstill. I do not take the view of this Bill that the right hon. Gentleman does; nor does the majority of the House. I cannot understand how it is arrived at because, notwithstanding all the denunciations we have heard, every Member of the House will recognise that no argument has been addressed to convince us that it was wrong to try to bring unemployed men, where suitable, to work on the land. The right hon. Gentleman took the gross cost of smallholdings, but I want him to bear in mind what we are setting against it. If a man is equipped with a holding, supposing it does take £1,000, what have you got? You have a house and a home and land, equipment, and a self-supporting citizen no longer drawing unemployment benefit. You have to put all these things against the cost. I suggest to the right hon. Gentleman that when he described this as pouring out public money, he was using terms which do not apply.
I regard this as a first-class national investment. If right hon. Gentlemen think, as their contention seems to mean, that it is a better investment to leave these poor fellows banging about the towns without giving them a chance and simply paying them so much a week to do nothing—if that is the issue between us, I am proud to take up the standpoint which we on our side take up. From beginning to end there has never been a vestige of alternative constructive suggestion. I thank the hon. Lady for her great contribution. Let us look at the other side. Being bereft of arguments
with which to defeat the Bill, the Opposition has fallen back on metaphor. The right hon. Gentleman the Member for Stafford (Mr. Ormsby-Gore) conjured up to his aid some vague inhabitants of a blessed region, while another hon. Member, in denouncing the Bill, said it was the Brobdingnagian output of a Lilliputian brain. Finally, the right hon. Gentleman the Member for the New Forest (Colonel Ashley), in a speech to, which he treated the country last week, thoroughly let himself go, and said, more or less, that we were fitting disciples of Mephistopheles who had better look to his antlers lest they were outdone by those of the Minister of Agriculture.
I came to the conclusion when I listened to these diatribes, that in Committee upstairs and on the Floor of the House we thoroughly defeated the Opposition. The fact is that they had no case left against the Bill, and had to fall back on this kind of thing. They had to call to their aid Gulliver and Faust and other people of the mystical world. This House has not heard, either on the Floor of the House or in Committee, any reasoned case against taking waste land, and putting it to use. It has never heard a case against taking land that needs draining, and draining it. It has never heard a case against taking an unemployed man who is fit and his wife, and giving them training, and enabling them to earn a, living out of cultivating land that needs cultivating. Finally, just when we are going to send it along the passage to another place—which I hope will appreciate its transcendent merits—sent with the approval of the Committee, fortified by examination in this House, and with no material matter ever left undiscussed, they now, at the eleventh hour and, shall I say, at the 58th minute, tell us that their Lordships will deal with it. The right hon. Gentleman anticipates the result; in other words, he sends his orders to their Lordships. We accept that challenge. If those who have the land refuse it to the landless, it will not be the first time they have made the attempt but I will undertake to say that, as before, that endeavour will bring retribution. The right hon. Gentleman's challenge, as his denunciation, leaves us cold. This is a good Bill, and people know it is a good Bill, and I hope that by a large majority we shall give it a Third Reading.

Question put, "That the Bill be now read the Third time."

The House divided: Ayes, 282; Noes, 226.

Division No. 144.]
AYES.
[11.0 p.m.


Adamson, Rt. Hon. W. (Fife, West)
Gray, Milner
Malone, C. L'Estrange (N'thampton)


Adamson, W. M. (Staff., Cannock)
Greenwood, Rt. Hon. A. (Colne).
Mansfield, W.


Addison, Rt. Hon. Dr. Christopher
Grenfell, D. R. (Glamorgan)
Marcus, M.


Aitchlson, Rt. Hon. Craigie M.
Griffith, F. Kingsley (Middlesbro' W.)
Markham, S. F.


Alexander, Rt. Hon. A. V. (Hillsbro')
Griffiths, T. (Monmouth, Pontypool)
Marley, J.


Alpass, J. H.
Groves, Thomas E.
Marshall, Fred


Angell, Sir Norman
Grundy, Thomas W.
Mathers, George


Arnott, John
Hall, F. (York, W.R., Normanton)
Matters, L. W.


Aske, Sir Robert
Hall, G. H. (Merthyr Tydvil)
Maxton, James


Attlee, Clement Richard
Hall, J. H. (Whitechapel)
Melville, Sir James


Ayles, Walter
Hall, Capt. W. G. (Portsmouth, C.)
Middleton, G.


Baker, John(Wolverhampton, Bilston)
Hamilton, Mary Agnes (Blackburn)
Mills, J. E.


Baldwin, Oliver (Dudley)
Hamilton, Sir R. (Orkney & Zetland)
Milner, Major J.


Barnes, Alfred John
Hardie, George D.
Montague, Frederick


Barr, James
Harris, Percy A.
Morgan, Dr. H. S.


Batey, Joseph
Hartshorn, Rt. Hon. Vernon
Morley, Ralph


Bellamy, Albert
Hastings, Dr. Somerville
Morris, Rhys Hopkins


Bennett, Sir E. N. (Cardiff, Central)
Haycock, A. W.
Morrison, Rt. Hon. H. (Hackney, S.)


Bennett, William (Battersea, South)
Hayday, Arthur
Morrison, Robert C. (Tottenham, N.)


Benson, G.
Hayes, John Henry
Mort, D. L.


Blindell, James
Henderson, Rt. Hon. A. (Burnley)
Mosley, Lady C. (Stokn-on-Trent)


Bondfield, Rt. Hon. Margaret
Henderson, Arthur, junr. (Cardiff, S.)
Muff, G.


Bowen, J. W.
Henderson, Thomas (Glasgow)
Muggeridge, H. T.


Bowerman, Rt. Hon. Charles W.
Henderson, W. W. (Middx., Enfield)
Murnin, Hugh


Broad, Francis Alfred
Herriotts, J.
Naylor, T. E.


Brockway, A. Fenner
Hirst, G. H. (York, W.R.,Wentworth)
Newman, Sir R. H. S. D. L. (Exeter)


Bromfield, William
Hirst, W. (Bradford, South)
Noel Baker, P. J.


Brooke, W.
Hoffman, P. C.
Noel-Buxton, Baroness (Norfolk, N.)


Brothers, M.
Hollins, A.
Oldfield, J. R.


Brown, Ernest (Leith)
Hopkin, Daniel
Cliver, George Harold (Ilkeston)


Brown, Rt. Hon. J. (South Ayrshire)
Hore-Belisha, Leslie
Oliver, P. M. (Man., Blackley)


Buchanan, G.
Horrabin, J. F.
Owen, Major G. (Carnarvon)


Burgess, F. G.
Hudson, James H. (Huddersfield)
Palin, John Henry


Burgin, Dr. E. L.
Hunter, Dr. Joseph
Palmer, E. T.


Buxton, C. R. (Yorks. W. R. Elland)
Hutchison, Maj.-Gen. Sir R.
Perry, S. F.


Calne, Derwent Hall.
Isaacs, George
Peters, Dr. Sidney John


Cameron, A. G.
Jenkins, Sir William
Pethick-Lawrence, F. W.


Cape, Thomas
John, William (Rhondda, West)
Phillips, Dr. Marlon


Carter, W. (St. Pancras, S.W.)
Johnston, Thomas
Picton-Turbervill, Edith


Charleston, H. C.
Jones, F. Llewellyn. (Flint)
Pole, Major D. G.


Chater, Daniel
Jones, Henry Haydn (Merioneth)
Potts, John S.


Clarke, J. S.
Jones, J. J. (West Ham, Silvertown)
Price, M. P.


Cluse, W. S.
Jones, Morgan (Caerphiily)
Pybus, Percy John


Clynes, Rt. Hon. John R.
Jowett, Rt. Hon. F. W.
Quibell, D. J. K.


Cocks, Frederick Seymour
Jowitt, Sir W. A. (Preston)
Ramsay, T. B. Wilson


Compton, Joseph
Kedward, R. M. (Kent, Ashford)
Rathbone, Eleancr


Cripps, Sir Stafford
Kennedy, Rt. Hon. Thomas
Raynes, W. R.


Daggar, George
Kenworthy, Lt.-Com. Hon. Joseph M.
Richards, R.


Dallas, George
Kinley, J.
Richardson, R. (Houghton-le-Spring)


Dalton, Hugh
Kirkwood, D.
Rlley, F. F. (Stockton-on-Tees)


Davies, E. C. (Montgomery)
Knight, Holford
Ritson, J.


Davies, Rhys John (Westhoughton)
Lang, Gordon
Romeril, H. G.


Day, Harry
Lansbury, Rt. Hon. George
Rosbotham, D. S. T.


Dudgeon, Major C. R.
Lathan, G.
Rothschild, J.


Dukes, C.
Law, Albert (Bolton)
Rowson, Guy


Duncan, Charles
Law, A. (Rossendale)
Salter, Dr. Alfred


Ede, James Chuter
Lawrie, Hugh Hartley (Stalybridge)
Samuel, Rt. Hon. Sir H. (Darwen)


Edmunds, J. E.
Lawson, John James
Sanders, W. S.


Edwards, C. (Monmouth, Bedwellty)
Lawther, W. (Barnard Castle)
Sawyer, G. F.


Edwards, E. (Morpeth)
Leach, W.
Scott, James


Egan, W. H.
Lee, Frank (Derby, N.E.)
Scrymgeour, E.


Elmley, Viscount
Lee, Jennie (Lanark, Northern)
Scurr, John


Evans, Capt. Ernest (Welsh Univer.)
Lees, J.
Sexton, Sir James


Foot, Isaac
Lewis, T. (Southampton)
Shaw, Rt. Hon. Thomas (Preston)


Forgan, Dr. Robert
Lloyd, C. Ellis
Shepherd, Arthur Lewis


Freeman, Peter
Logan, David Gilbert
Sherwood, G. H.


Gardner, B. W. (West Ham, Upton)
Longbottom, A. W.
Shield, George William


George, Rt. Hon. D. Lloyd (Car'vn)
Longden, F.
Shiels, Dr. Drummond


George, Megan Lloyd (Anglesea)
Lunn, William
Shillaker, J. F.


Glbbins, Joseph
Macdonald, Gordon (Ince)
Shinwell, E.


Gibson, H. M. (Lanes. Mossley)
MacDonald, Malcolm (Bassetlaw)
Short, Alfred (Wednesbury)


Gill, T. H.
Macdonald, Sir M. (Inverness)
Simmons, C. J.


Gillett, George M.
McElwee, A.
Sinclair, Sir A. (Caithness)


Glassey, A. E.
McEntee, V. L.
Sitch, Charles H.


Gossling, A. G.
McKinlay, A.
Smith, Alfred (Sunderland)


Gould, F.
MacLaren, Andrew
Smith, Ben (Bermondsey, Rotherhithe)


Graham, D. M. (Lanark, Hamilton)
Maclean, Sir Donald (Cornwall, N.)
Smith, Frank (Nuneaton)


Graham, Rt. Hon. Wm. (Edin., Cent.)
Maclean, Nell (Glasgow, Govan)
Smith, Rennie (Penistone)


Granville, E.
McShane, John James
Smith, Tom (Pontefract)


Smith, W. R. (Norwich)
Tout, W. J.
White, H. G.


Snowden, Rt. Hon. Philip
Townend, A. E.
Whiteley, Wilfrid (Birm., Ladywood)


Snowden, Thomas (Accrington)
Trevelyan, Rt. Hon. Sir Charles
Wilkinson, Ellen C.


Sorensen, R.
Vaughan, David
Williams, David (Swansea, East)


Stamford, Thomas W.
Viant, S. P.
Williams, Dr. J. H. (Llanelly)


Stephen, Campbell
Walkden, A. G.
Williams, T. (York, Don Valley)


Strachey, E. J. St. Loe
Walker, J.
Wilton C. H. (Sheffield, Attercliffe)


Strauss, G. R.
Wallace, H. W.
Wilson, J. (Oldham)


Sullivan, J.
Watkins, F. C.
Wilson, R. J. (Jarrow)


Sutton, J. E.
Watson, W. M. (Dunfermline)
Winterton, G. E.(Leicester, Loughb'gh)


Taylor, R. A. (Lincoln)
Watts-Morgan, Lt.-Col. D. (Rhondda)
Wise, E. F.


Taylor, W. B. (Norfolk, S.W.)
Wellock, Wilfred
Wood, Major McKenzie (Banff)


Thomas, Rt. Hon. J. H. (Derby)
Welsh, James (Paisley)
Young, R. S. (Islington, North)


Thurtle, Ernest
Welsh, James C. (Coatbridge)



Tinker, John Joseph
West, F. R.
TELLERS FOR THE AYES.—


Toole, Joseph
Westwood, Joseph
Mr. Allen Parkinson and Mr Paling.


NOES.


Acland-Troyte, Lieut.-Colonel
Crookshank, Cpt. H. (Lindsey, Gainsbro)
Lewis, Oswald (Colchester)


Ainsworth, Lieut.-Col. Charles
Croom-Johnson, R. P.
Little, Sir Ernest Graham


Albery, Irving James
Culverwell, C. T. (Bristol, West)
Llewellin, Major J. J.


Alexander, Sir Wm. (Glasgow, Cent'l)
Cunllffe-Lister, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip
Locker-Lampson, Rt. Hon. Godfrey


Allen, Sir J. Sandeman (Llverp'I.W.)
Dalkeith, Earl of
Locker-Lampson, Com. O.(Handsw'th)


Allen, W. E. D. (Belfast, W.)
Dalrymple-White, Lt.-Col. Sir Godfrey
Long, Major Hon. Eric


Amery, Rt. Hon. Leopold C. M. S.
Davies, Dr. Vernon
Lymington, Viscount


Ashley, U.-Col. Rt. Hon. Wilfrid W.
Davies, Maj. Geo. F.(Somerset,Yeovil)
McConnell, Sir Joseph


Astor, Maj. Hon. John J.(Kent, Dover)
Davison, Sir W. H. (Kensington, S.)
Macdonald, Capt. P. D. (I. of W.)


Atholl, Duchess of
Dawson, Sir Philip
Maitland, A. (Kent, Faversham)


Atkinson, C.
Dixey, A. C.
Makins, Brigadier-General E.


Ba[...]ie-Hamilton, Hon. Charles W.
Dixon, Captain Rt. Hon. Herbert
Margesson, Captain H. D.


Baldwin, Rt. Hon. Stanley (Bewdley)
Duckworth, G. A. V.
Marjoribanks, Edward


Balfour, George (Hampstead)
Dugdale, Capt. T. L.
Mason, Colonel Glyn K.


Balfour, Captain H. H. (I. of Thanet)
Eden, Captain Anthony
Meller, R. J.


Balniel, Lord
Edmondson, Major A. J.
Merriman, Sir F. Boyd


Beamish, Rear-Admiral T. P. H.
Elliot, Major Walter E.
Mitchell, Sir W. Lane (Streatham)


Beaumont, M. W.
Erskine, Lord (Somerset, Wetton-s.M.)
Mitchell-Thomson, Rt. Hon. Sir W.


Bellairs, Commander Carlyon
Everard, W. Lindsay
Moore, Sir Newton J. (Richmond)


Bettorton, Sir Henry B.
Falle, Sir Bertram G.
Moore, Lieut.-Colonel T. C. R. (Ayr)


Bevan, S. J. (Holborn)
Ferguson, Sir John
Morrison, W. S. (Glos., Cirencester)


Birchall, Major Sir John Dearman
Fermoy, Lord
Muirhead, A. J.


Bird, Ernest Roy
Fielden, E. B.
Nelson, Sir Frank


Boothby, R. J. G.
Flson, F. G. Clavering
Newton, Sir D. G. C. (Cambridge)


Bourne, Captain Robert Croft.
Ford, sir P. J.
Nicholson, O. (Westminster)


Bowater, Col. Sir T. Vanslttart
Forestler-Walker, Sir L.
Nicholson, Col. Rt. Hn.W. G.(Ptrsf'ld)


Bowyer, Captain Sir George E. W.
Fremantle, Lieut.-Colonel Francis E.
Nield, Ht. Hon. Sir Herbert


Boyce, Leslie
Galbraith, J. F. W.
O'Connor, T. J.


Bracken, B.
Gauit, Lieut.-Col. A. Hamilton
O'Neill, Sir H.


Braithwaite, Major A. N.
Gibson, c. G. (Pudsey & Otley)
Ormshy-Gore, Rt. Hon. William


Brass, Captain Sir William
Glyn, Major R. G. C.
Peake, Capt. Osbert


Briscoe, Richard Georga
Gower, Sir Robert
Penny, Sir George


Brown, Col. D. C. (N'th'l'd., Hexham)
Grace, John
Percy, Lord Eustace (Hastings)


Brown, Brig.-Gen.H.C.(Berks, Nawb'y)
Graham, Fergus (Cumberland, N.)
Peto, Sir Basil E. (Devon, Barnstaple)


Buchan-Hepburn, P. G. T.
Grattan-Doyle, Sir N.
Power, Sir John Cecil


Buchan, John
Greene, W. P. Crawford
Pownall, Sir Assheton


Bullock, Captain Malcolm
Grenfell, Edward C. (City of London)
Purbrick, R.


Butler, R. A.
Gretton, Colonel Rt. Hon. John
Ramsbotham, H.


Butt, Sir Alfred
Gritten, W. G. Howard
Rawson, Sir Cooper


Cadogan, Major Hon. Edward
Guinness, Rt. Hon. Walter E.
Reid, David D. (County Down)


Campbell, E. T.
Gunston, Captain D. W.
Remer, John R.


Carver, Major W. H.
Hacking, Rt. Hon. Douglas H.
Rentoul, Sir Gervals S.


Castle Stewart, Earl of
Hail, Lieut.-Col. Sir F. (Dulwich)
Reynolds, Col. Sir James


Cautley, Sir Henry S.
Hamilton, Sir George (llford)
Richardson, Sir P. W. (Sur'y, Ch'te'y)


Cayzer, Sir C. (Chester, City)
Hammersley, S. S.
Roberts, Sir Samuel (Ecclesam)


Cayzer, Maj.Sir Herbt. R. (Prtsmth.S)
Hanbury, C
Rodd, Rt. Hon. Sir James Rennell


Cazalet, Captain victor A.
Hannon, Patrick Joseph Henry
Ross, Major Ronald D.


Cecil, Rt. Hon. Lord H. (Ox. Univ.)
Harvey, Major S. E. (Devon, Totnes)
Ruggles-Brise, Lieut.-Colonel E. A.


Chadwick, Capt. Sir Robert Burton
Haslam, Henry C.
Russell, Alexander West (Tynemouth)


Chamberlain, Rt. Hn. Sir J.A.(Birm.,W.)
Heneage, Lieut.-Colonel Arthur p.
Salmon, Major I.


Chamberlain, Rt. Hon. N. (Edgbaston)
Hills, Major Rt. Hon. John Waller
Samuel, A. M. (Surrey, Farnham)


Christle, J. A.
Hope, Sir Harry (Forfar)
Sandeman, Sir N. Stewart


Churchill, Rt. Hon. Winston Spencer
Howard-Bury, Colonel C. K.
Sassoon, Rt. Hon. Sir Philip A. G. D.


Clydesdale, Marquess of
Hudson, Capt. A. U. M. (Hackney, N.)
Savery, S. S.


Cobb, Sir Cyril
Hurd, Percy A.
Shepperson, Sir Ernest Whittome


Cockerill, Brig.-General Sir George
Iveagh, Countess of
Simms, Major-General J.


Cohen, Major J. Brunel
Jones, Sir G. W. H. (Stoke New'gton)
Sinclair, Col. T. (Queen's U., Bellst)


Colman, N. C. D.
Kindersley, Major G. M.
Smith, Louis W. (Sheffield, Hallam)


Colville, Major D. J.
Knox, Sir Alfred
Smith, R. W. (Aberd'n & Kinc'dine, C.)


Courtauld, Major J. S.
Lamb, Sir J. O.
Smith-Carington, Neville W.


Courthope, Colonel Sir G. L.
Lane Fox, Col. Rt. Hon. George R.
Smithest, Waldron


Cranborne, Viscount
Law, Sir Alfred (Derby, H[...]gh Peak)
Somerset, Thomas


Crichton-Stuart, Lord C.
Leigh, Sir John (Clapham)
Somerville, A. A. (Windsor)


Croft, Brigadier-General Sir H.
Leighton, Major B. E. P.
Somerville, D. G. (Willesden, East)




Southby, Commander A. R. J.
Train, J.
Winterton, Rt. Hon. Earl


Spender-Clay, Colonel H.
Tryon, Rt. Hon. George Clement
Withers, Sir John James


Stanley, Lord (Fylde)
Turton, Robert Hugh
Wolmer, Rt. Hon. Viscount


Stanley, Maj. Hon. O. (W'morland)
Wallace, Capt. D. E. (Hornsey)
Womersley, W. J.


Steel-Maitland, Rt. Hon. Sir Arthur
Ward, Lieut.-Col. Sir A. Lambert
Wood, Rt. Hon. Sir Kingsley


Stewart, W. J. (Belfast, South)
Wardlaw-Milne, J. S.
Worthington- Evans, Rt. Hon. Sir L.


Stuart, Hon. J. (Moray and Nairn)
Warrender, Sir Victor
Wright, Brig. Gen. W. D. (Tavist'k)


Sueter, Rear-Admiral M. F.
Waterhouse, Captain Charles
Young, Rt. Hon. Sir Hilton


Thomas, Major L. B. (King's Norton)
Wayland, Sir William A.



Thomson, Sir F.
Wells, Sydney R.
TELLERS FOR THE NOES.—


Tinne, J. A.
Williams, Charles (Devon, Torquay)
Commander Sir Bolton Eyres-Monsell and Major Sir George Hennessy.


Titchfield, Major the Marquess of
Wilson, G. H. A. (Cambridge U.)



Todd, Capt. A. J.
Windsor-Cilve, Lieut.-Colonel George



Question put, and agreed to.

Bill accordingly read the Third time, and passed.

Orders of the Day — CHINA INDEMNITY (APPLICATION) BILL.

Not amended (in the Standing Committee) considered.

Lord HUGH CECIL: I beg to move, "That the further Consideration of the Bill be now adjourned."
I can assure the Government that this Motion is not due to any hostility to the Bill, but merely in order that an opportunity may be given to those who are interested in it from an educational point of view to propose such Amendments to the Bill as we think may be required. [HON. MEMBERS: "Speak up; we cannot hear you!"] We are very anxious that in the arrangements which are made in the Bill the interests of Chinese culture in the universities should be considered. No provision is made in the Bill for supporting those studies even in the universities which have already devoted some attention to them. There is provision in the Schedule for £200,000 to be given to the universities, and it is to be administered by a committee which is to be a chartered body. The proposed charter has not yet received the Royal approbation and its exact purport is not yet known. But, as far as it is known, it does not appear to make provision for supporting the studies in Chinese language and culture in the universities which have so far been devoting themselves to the subject, and we are anxious to have a full opportunity of thinking the matter over and so being able to formulate whatever Amendment is required to provide that those universities which have already devoted their attention to Chinese culture should receive whatever support can be given to them out of the indemnity. It seems rather strange. though I have no doubt the Government have good reasons for it, to
give £200,000 out of the indemnity to a body which has not yet any legal existence. This committee has not yet received the Royal Charter, I understand, and it is odd that the Bill should be carried out of the House of Commons to the other House of Parliament with a provision in it which gives £200,000 to a body which has not yet any legal position.
Therefore, we are anxious for a little time in which to think the thing over, not with the smallest hostility to the Bill or to what the Government design in it, but in order to carry out what, I am sure, they wish as much as we, namely, the cultivation of Chinese studies in London, Oxford and other universities, and the use of the money for the purpose of such studies. For this reason I have been asked to move a short postponement, of some days, perhaps, in order that we may look into the matter and formulate our proposals in a more distinct form. I do not know whether the Government would be prepared to receive a deputation from the universities interested, but I feel sure that, in whatever way it may be brought about, there might be a private interchange of counsel between the Government and the universities interested, with the object of promoting this object which is common to us all. I hope that the Government will be able to assent to this Motion, or, if not, to assure us of their co-operation in the object which we have at heart, which is to use this money to promote a mutual understanding between China and Great Britain by encouraging the study of the Chinese culture and language in the universities of this country.

The UNDER-SECRETARY of STATE for FOREIGN AFFAIRS (Mr. Dalton): The Noble Lord has moved this Motion in a speech with a great part of which I am in full sympathy. As he said, the universities have come forward in this matter rather late in the day. The Bill
was printed before Christmas; it was read a Second time in this House wall-out a Division; and during the Second Reading Debate the point which the Noble Lord has raised was not made by any of the university representatives in this House. It was then considered by a Standing Committee, and the point was raised by my hon. Friend the Member for Cambridge University (Sir J. Withers); and I then made a statement on behalf of the Government to the effect that we were advised that it would be competent for the Universities China Committee to devote some part of the £200,000 allocated to them in the Bill to increasing the provision for Chinese teaching in the universities.
I had hopes that that satisfied the universities who raised the point. I gather, however, since the Noble Lord has raised the matter again to-night, that they are not completely satisfied, and, in response to the appeal that he made at the end of his speech, I am authorised to say that I myself, or someone else acting on behalf of the Government, will be perfectly ready to meet representatives of the universities and discuss the matter. We have taken the view from the beginning that one of the objects—not the exclusive object, but one of the objects—which should be carried out by the Universities China Committee in allocating this money, was an increased provision for the teaching of Chinese in the universities. If it be the case that this is not sufficiently clearly within their competence, we are quite willing to consider what amendment might be made in the Bill in order to put that point beyond question.
I cannot, however, accept the proposal that we should not dispose of the Bill to-night. I would rather suggest that such a consultation should take place, and that in another place an Amendment should be moved on behalf of the Government, consequent upon consultation between representatives of the Government and representatives of the universities. I hope that, that undertaking being given, as I do unequivocally give it, we shall be able to get the final stages of this Bill to-night. There are dependent upon this Bill other matters than increased provision for the teaching of Chinese. There are £3,000,000 worth of orders for British industry, and
these we are unwilling to see postponed any longer than is absolutely necessary. There are other provisions also of an educational and industrial character, and the Government attach great importance to getting the Bill forward with the least possible delay. I hope, in view of the statement I have made, the Noble Lord will not press his Motion, but will, with other university representatives, enter into consultation with us for further elucidation of the point whicih still seems to be in doubt.

Mr. SPEAKER: I have not made up my mind yet whether this is a Money Bill under the Parliament Act. There is some doubt about it, and I should not like to say off-hand that this will be a Money Bill.

The PRESIDENT of the BOARD of TRADE (Mr. William Graham): On that point may I submit that the Bill, of course, imposes no charge. It merely introduces certain variations in the use of the fund, and it may be that on that basis you will be prepared to indicate now that there will be less difficulty in dealing with it in another place by way of Amendment, such as my hon. Friend has suggested.

Mr. SPEAKER: That is hardly the point. The point is that if the Bill is exclusively a Bill dealing with money I have to certify it as a Money Bill under the Parliament Act. It does not follow that it makes a charge at all. If it exclusively deals with money I have to certify that it is a Money Bill.

Sir AUSTEN CHAMBERLAIN: We who wish to know the exact conditions in which we are acting are all grateful for the warning that you, Sir, have just addressed to the House. The Government will not wish certainly to offer any undertaking which it would be beyond their power to fulfil. That warning does, I think, very materially alter the situation from what it was when the Under-Secretary was speaking, and I would once again press the request made by my noble Friend in no more unfriendly spirit than that with which he himself presented it, for the hon. Gentleman opposite knows I am deeply committed to the general principles and purposes of the Bill, and have its objects quite as much at heart as he has. I would press his request
again, so that at least we may be assured that if, as the result of these promises, an Amendment is desirable, we may not have put it beyond our power to make that Amendment, and find that it is not within the power of the other House to make it.
One other point I would ask the hon. Gentleman to consider. I understand from what my Noble Friend said that the China Parliamentary Committee is to be constituted and its functions defined by a Royal Charter. I do not think that Royal Charter has received the Royal approval yet and I presume it cannot have been laid before Parliament. Does he not think it would be fair to allow Parliament to see what is the constitution and what are the powers of the body to which is to be entrusted this sum before we finally decide whether to leave everything to their discretion, or whether it is desirable that the House should formally indicate its own wishes as to the form which the expenditure of part of this money should take. I submit that it really would be improper to part with the Bill without knowing whether the Amendments which the Government are ready to make in another place can be considered by that House; and it is, in addition, highly desirable that we should have a draft of the Charter before us when determining what powers we entrust to the Committee and what limitations we impose upon those powers.

Sir JOHN WITHERS: I wish to reinforce the remarks of my right hon. Friend the Member for West Birmingham (Sir Austen Chamberlain). The whole point is a very short one. As far as the Charter which has been indicated to us is concerned it would not enable the committee to make university grants. If that is so, the whole idea of benefiting the university goes by the board. If there is difficulty the Government should appreciate it and enable us to discuss with them the provisions of the Charter, to see whether they have the powers to do what they wish to do. I think there is nothing more to be said on the matter.

Captain BOURNE: I wish to deal for a minute with a point of procedure. In view of your Ruling, Mr. Speaker, I will ask the Government to postpone the con-
sideration of this Bill for a short time. If, as you have indicated, this may be a Money Bill it is obvious that it cannot be amended without difficulties in another place. The Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs, speaking to-night, has indicated that the Government are willing to consider certain Amendments. I am not in a position to say whether those Amendments are desirable or not, but I urge that the House should have the opportunity of considering them if they cannot be moved in another place. This seems to be a very strong argument for the Government to consent to postpone for a short time the Amendments put on the Paper. I do not believe that this Bill is so urgent that a week's postponement will do any harm, and I feel that it is most desirable that there should be a postponement.

Mr. CHURCHILL: Surely we are going to have an answer from the Government?

Mr. GODFREY WILSON: It is only fair to explain why at the last moment this question should be brought up. I should like to make it clear that it was only last Sunday that the Vice-Chan-cellor of Cambridge University sent for me and showed me a letter and memorandum he had received from the Secretary of the University Bureau of the British Empire. In this memorandum, there is a draft Charter for the Universities China Committee. The purposes which the Universities China Committee are to follow are laid down, and those purposes, I think, I must be allowed to read.
The purposes of the Universities China Committee, hereinafter called the governing body, shall be:—

(1) to co-operate with the universities of the United Kingdom through the Universities Bureau in arranging for representative Chinese men and women to visit and lecture in this country, and similarly for British men and women to visit and lecture in China;
(2) to co-operate with other interested bodies in asssisting Chinese students in this country to find hospitality and suitable living accommodation;
(3) in consultation with the Universities Bureau and with university and other authorities concerned with higher education to advise Chinese students as to their course of studies in this country, and as to other matters connected therewith."

This is the important purpose:
(4) generally to encourage intellectual co-operation and to promote cultural relations between China and the United Kingdom.
The point which universities particularly desire to press is that No. 4 beginning with the word "generally," and following what is mentioned very specificially in 1, 2 and 3, might easily be held to exclude the particular purposes which we have in mind, and to which the Government have also indicated their consent and approval. It is in order to get that point, which only came to our notice a few days ago, made perfectly clear, that it is being raised at this last moment.

Mr. ERNEST BROWN: I hope that the right hon. Gentleman will agree to a postponement of the Debate. The point raised by the Noble Lord is important. I am not clear whether or not it is competent for us to discuss the details of the charter in this House. I am not at all sure that it is not a matter of His Majesty's privilege and that the Government cannot give the undertaking which is asked. Therefore, it is important that a postponement should be granted and that consultations should take place, in order that we may be sure of what we are doing with the money and in order that the universities may be so placed that the money will serve the purpose which we mutually desire.

Mr. W. GRAHAM: I think the House will agree that the position of the Government is quite clear in this matter, but I shall briefly repeat it, before making a proposal to the House. The Second Reading of the Bill was taken and also the Committee stage upstairs, and there was no suggestion at all of postponing it at either of those stages. Nor had the Government any intimation from the Noble Lord, or any other hon. Member, that a Motion for the postponement of the proceedings on the Bill was intended to-night. I desire to make that perfectly clear. At the same time, my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary of State for Foreign Affairs pointed out that if there was a desire to clear up this matter of the use of the fund, more particularly as related to the Universities China Committee, an opportunity would be afforded for discussion
and any Amendment that was agreed upon would be inserted in another place. Since that declaration was made, Mr. Speaker has indicated that it might be ruled that this is a Money Bill. As you have not finally ruled on that matter, Mr. Speaker, I hope I shall not be lacking in respect if I say that I took the view that this was not merely a matter of the allocation of funds, but referred to contracts and other subjects, and did not particularly bear on the question of a charge. I think it cannot be regarded as a Money Bill, but I do not want to argue that now. It may be that that view will prevail. If that view can be regarded as correct, then an amendment can be made in another place, but I must bear in mind, with great respect, Mr. Speaker's view. His view may be taken, that this is a Money Bill, and that therefore any Amendment would be precluded in another place, and it would be inconsistent with my hon. Friend's offer to run the risk of our being prevented from moving an Amendment on that point which may be mutually desired. If the House will accept that explanation, which I think will he accepted, I am quite willing in the circumstances to postpone the further consideration of this Bill for a few days, and to suggest to the House that we might to-morrow—my hon. Friend the Under-Secretary and others—consult together in order to clear up the matter, and, if possible, to arrive at an agreement.

Lord H. CECIL: I wish to thank the right hon. Gentleman for his suggestion, with which I heartily agree.

Sir A. CHAMBERLAIN: Might I suggest that a draft of the Charter should be issued as a White Paper, so that we may know what is really the determining document in this matter?

Mr. GRAHAM: I cannot give the right hon. Gentleman any reply on that point. I think we had better wait until after we have had a joint meeting tomorrow to ascertain the position with regard to this Charter.

Ordered, "That further Consideration of the Bill, not amended, be now adjourned."

Bill, not amended (in the Standing Committee), to be further considered, To-morrow.

The remaining Orders were read, and postponed.

It being after Half-past Eleven of the Clock, Mr. SPEAKER adjourned the House, without Question put, pursuant to the Standing Order.

Adjourned at Twenty-three Minutes before Twelve o'Clock.